#and doesn't put your art into the ai system against your will!!

[cinnabell2]

Prof Venti after class~ this is is a collab with @wheatcak3 !!! Im so happy we finally got to collab!

#Putting the un filtered/ glazed version here because tumblr is cool #and doesn't put your art into the ai system against your will!! #espcially since i have basic bitch anime cel shaded style 🤡🤡 #But yeah finally get to draw after WEEKS #venti genshin impact #venti #genshin impact venti #genshin impact #genshin impact fanart #art #cinna-arts

[kayuripax]

Valve news and the AI

So. I assume people saw some posts going around on how valve has new AI rules, and things getting axed. And because we live in a society, I went down the rabbit hole to learn my information for myself. Here's what I found, under a cut to keep it easier. To start off, I am not a proponent of AI. I just don't like misinformation. So. Onwards.

VALVE AND THE AI

First off, no, AI will not take things over. Let me show you, supplemented by the official valve news post from here. (because if hbomberguy taught us anything it is to cite your sources)

[Image id: a screenshot from the official valve blog. It says the following:

First, we are updating the Content Survey that developers fill out when submitting to Steam. The survey now includes a new AI disclosure section, where you'll need to describe how you are using AI in the development and execution of your game. It separates AI usage in games into two broad categories:

Pre-Generated: Any kind of content (art/code/sound/etc) created with the help of AI tools during development. Under the Steam Distribution Agreement, you promise Valve that your game will not include illegal or infringing content, and that your game will be consistent with your marketing materials. In our pre-release review, we will evaluate the output of AI generated content in your game the same way we evaluate all non-AI content - including a check that your game meets those promises.

Live-Generated: Any kind of content created with the help of AI tools while the game is running. In addition to following the same rules as Pre-Generated AI content, this comes with an additional requirement: in the Content Survey, you'll need to tell us what kind of guardrails you're putting on your AI to ensure it's not generating illegal content. End image ID]

So. Let us break that down a bit, shall we? Valve has been workshopping these new AI rules since last June, and had adopted a wait and see approach beforehand. This had cost them a bit of revenue, which is not ideal if you are a company. Now they have settled on a set of rules. Rules that are relatively easy to understand. - Rule one: Game devs have to disclose when their game has AI - Rule two: If your game uses AI, you have to say what kind it uses. Did you generate the assets ahead of time, and they stay like that? Or are they actively generated as the consumer plays? - Rule three: You need to tell Valve the guardrails you have to make sure your live-generating AI doesn't do things that are going against the law. - Rule four: If you use pre-generated assets, then your assets cannot violate copyright. Valve will check to make sure that you aren't actually lying.

That doesn't sound too bad now, does it? This is a way Valve can keep going. Because they will need to. And ignoring AI is, as much as we all hate it, not going to work. They need to face it. And they did. So. Onto part two, shall we?

[Image ID: a screenshot from the official Valve blog. It says the following: Valve will use this disclosure in our review of your game prior to release. We will also include much of your disclosure on the Steam store page for your game, so customers can also understand how the game uses AI. End image ID]

Let's break that down. - Valve will show you if games use AI. Because they want you to know that. Because that is transparency.

Part three.

[Image ID: A screenshot from the official Valve blog. It says the following:

Second, we're releasing a new system on Steam that allows players to report illegal content inside games that contain Live-Generated AI content. Using the in-game overlay, players can easily submit a report when they encounter content that they believe should have been caught by appropriate guardrails on AI generation.

Today's changes are the result of us improving our understanding of the landscape and risks in this space, as well as talking to game developers using AI, and those building AI tools. This will allow us to be much more open to releasing games using AI technology on Steam. The only exception to this will be Adult Only Sexual Content that is created with Live-Generated AI - we are unable to release that type of content right now. End Image ID]

Now onto the chunks.

Valve is releasing a new system that makes it easier to report questionable AI content. Specifically live-generated AI content. You can easily access it by steam overlay, and it will be an easier way to report than it has been so far.

Valve is prohibiting NSFW content with live-generating AI. Meaning there won't be AI generated porn, and AI companions for NSWF content are not allowed.

That doesn't sound bad, does it? They made some rules so they can get revenue so they can keep their service going, while also making it obvious for people when AI is used. Alright? Alright. Now calm down. Get yourself a drink.

---

Team Fortress Source 2

My used source here is this.

There was in fact a DCMA takedown notice. But it is not the only thing that led to the takedown. To sum things up: There were issues with the engine, and large parts of the code became unusable. The dev team decided that the notice was merely the final nail in the coffin, and decided to take it down. So that is that. I don't know more on this, so I will not say more, because I don't want to spread misinformation and speculation. I want to keep some credibility, please and thanks.

---

Portal Demake axed

Sources used are from here, here and here.

Portal 64 got axed. Why? Because it has to do with Nintendo. The remake uses a Nintendo library. And one that got extensively pirated at that. And we all know how trigger-happy Nintendo is with it's intellectual property. And Nintendo is not exactly happy with Valve and Steam, and sent them a letter in 2023.

[Image ID: a screenshot from a PC-Gamer article. It says the following: It's possible that Valve's preemptive strike against Portal 64 was prompted at least in part by an encounter with Nintendo in 2023 over the planned release of the Dolphin emulator for the Wii and Gamecube consoles on Steam. Nintendo sent a letter to Valve ahead of that launch that attorney Kellen Voyer of Voyer Law said was a "warning shot" against releasing it. End Image ID.]

So. Yeah. Nintendo doesn't like people doing things with their IP. Valve is most likely avoiding potential lawsuits, both for themselves and Lambert, the dev behind Portal 64. Nintendo is an enemy one doesn't want to have. Valve is walking the "better safe than sorry" path here.

---

There we go. This is my "let's try and clear up some misinformation" post. I am now going to play a game, because this took the better part of an hour. I cited my sources. Auf Wiedersehen.

#kayuri writes #infodump #valve #tf2 #portal 64 #team fortress source 2 #ask to tag #long post

[lllllllllllines]

(I urge that you read this to the end, as I know some of you will take pieces of what is said here and use it as ammunition for more drama. I can't really do tl;dr because i feel like it would ruin a lot of my points)

I don't usually like to deal with drama or discourse in general leaves a bad but I feel like this needs to be said.

This discourse is stupid, a lot of different points on either side due to several reasons at least in my opinion.

Ive seen many people who were against palworld use claims for stolen designs, mentions of AI art as well as lots of people either acting in defense of game freak/TPC/Nintendo as well as some acting in defense of artistic integrity.

I've seen the people who were for the game act in one singular way while just trying to have fun with it(which i cannot deny, it looks fun as fuck).

This being them claiming that they are just kissing the boots of Nintendo, though i don't think its quite fair to put them in the same category.

Just have fun with the game, no need to engage with the hate if you don't want to(even though i know it's difficult, especially when it's staring you in the face).

For those who are for, I only have a couple things to say.

Companies are not faceless entities, I know that this sounds like basic knowledge but I've noticed that's not something people usually mention.

Not everyone who attacks this game, cares for pokemon. Im gonna go in more depth when i get to them, but i feel like this needs be said.

While there are many good things on the internet, the internet as a whole, especially nowadays, is chaos and pain.

So many different opinions, leading to low self-esteem and rage.

You just want to have fun, you probably don't like pokemon, or if you do, you probably don't like what they've been doing with it.

You've seen the early trailers and had a laugh, found out this year that it came out, sought it out be cause hey, could be a bit of a meme.

But soon you start to actually have fun with it and hope it succeeds, despite some of the designs not being totally original, and you don't care.

But soon, like usual, you find that there are people who dislike the game.

In the real world, it doesn't matter to you, it rolls off you like nothing, because you don't know them, maybe you get into a heated argument with a friend.

But as soon as you hit the internet, you feel as though people are personally attacking something you like, (emotions are hard to convey through text) so you defend.

Not really caring about how it sounds to those you desperately fight against.

But in the end that's just adding fuel to the flame.

(though I can say that this discourse is great publicity for the game, good or bad it still lets people know that it exists.)

So just have fun with it.

(Unless dealing with discourse like this is fun for you idk)

For those who are against,

I am first going to speak to those who seem to want to defend Game Freak/TPC/Nintendo and those who speak for artistic integrity.

Why do any of your thoughts matter when it comes to a company.

as I had stated earlier, people usually associate companies and conglomerates as faceless entities.

They don't see them like systems, heavily broken systems, like if a beehive were born from an unloving tyrannical queen.

The ones at the top exist to fill their pockets while those at the bottom suffer for it.

I bet around half of the people speaking of artistic integrity don't really know the names of the designers of each pokemon(and to those who do, I'm glad, cause then I know you know what you're talking about.)

I feel as though speaking of artistic integrity only works when you're talking about an individual.

Which means, by extension, that a company like Nintendo, or the other two companies that own or work on the ip, those that see only the product and the work.

To them, artistic integrity is dead.

Why else would the shoot down fan works so heavily?

To keep their product close to the chest.

But what about the claims that they stole from fakemon artists?

To my knowledge, (please let me know if im wrong) there has only been one claim of such a thing, and it was soon taken back as they soon found out that the palworld model was older than their's.

Which im pretty sure proves that claim false.

And to the people who are against AI art, don't get me wrong, I hate the idea as much as you do.

But AI image generation like many things is a tool.

And if used properly, tools can be useful.

like say for example, you have an idea you want to draw, but you can't fully figure it out in your head.

There are no pictures that fully convey what ur thinking in the depth you want for a reference, you could use an image generator for reference.

Add to an image in your own way, while removing the parts that were taken by the algorithm.

Be creative.

When tools are used properly, they can do a lot of good things.

The reason people hate AI art, is because people are being stupid and lazy with it.

Hell, i think pocketpair realized their mistake a long time ago as not only has that game been absolutely shat on in the steam reviews, but you cant even find it on their website, or at least i haven't.

Lastly, I'm gonna show you a trailer for a game pocketpair is also making, it should be coming put Q1 this year.

A game I have not heard mentioned this whole discourse.

As an honest question, what part of this looks AI generated to you?

Its a 2D sidescrolling platformer, said to be a mix of a metroidvania and a roguelite, also with base building elements since that seems to be a commonality for them.

The only things i could see that were taken or inspired by are the backgrounds, which feel very hollow knight, and the main mechanic being a possession mechanic which loosely reminded me of super mario Odyssey.

I've seen AI 2D animation, and it's usually pretty jarring due to how quickly everything warps and changes as things move.

I don't see that in this.

Nor do i recognize any of the monster or character designs.

I could be wrong and both palworld and never grave could be scams, seeing as both are in early access.

And if or when i am, then that's egg on my face.

Those that were all happy to play a new and exciting game, will seeth and mald.

And you can live happily, i guess.

But it at least shows they know some integrity.

I mean, as long as they make any of the new pals that come out more original than the 111 that they have now, we should be fine.

The only time we should be outraged, is if there is sort of harm coming to the workers, and I don't think I've heard any news on that.

If it bothers you that much, make your own game.

Actively do something about it rather than complain on the internet.

Like, I can't even imagine how difficult that is.

Especially for a smaller company.

Pokemon has it easy, It doesn't need defense.

Defend it from itself before defending it from others.

Stop paying for shit that doesn't work out the gate.

Do something to force the people making the bad game to do better.

And stop trying to shit on the little guy for your own ideals.

Criticism is fine, yelling over a game on the internet is not.

Not by a long shot.

But hey I don't think anyone is gonna read this.

Much less to the end.

Because I've scrolled passed shorter posts for less.

#palworld #never grave #pocketpair #craftopia #nintendo #Youtube

[faint-kitten]

So about Solid Snake being in Fortnite...

by Faint_Kitten

I got into Fortnite in December 2023 for the first time. I just unlocked Snake and I have so many thoughts on it I can't completely break them all down. But I think I've done my best.

But the #1 thing I think I want everyone to know is: Despite shaving off his ass. Despite being artistically bankrupt and pushed out by Konami and Epic as a means to make money and promote the MGS Vol 2 collection.

Despite artistically, and Narratively being antithetical to Metal Gear Solid…

Snake being in Fortnite feels mechanically and tonally consistent with his legacy.

There is so much inherent "Kojima" in Metal Gear Solid. This weird blend of hyper realism, mixed with anime siliness, mixed with philosophy mixed with trying way too hard to be sombre while also mechanically being silly and then you spin around three times to puke, or Johnny does a big poop fart and all of it adds to the weird just Kojima-esque nature of the series. It extends to the love, the fandom and the humor around Metal Gear Solid. So many memes around Snake, between fan art, in jokes, and original Animations and gifs that it doesn't feel THAT weird to see him do like a...Naruto Run emote. So much of Metal Gear Solid* was a very serious drama taking place in a game that mechanically is silly and lets you do goofy shit and has elaborate bro fist handshakes played deadly serious. And Fortnite is a game where you have these characters doing goofy shit that doesn't mesh with who they are or the universe they came from all the fucking time.

You also have to realize the Battle Royale mode has big locations full of NPC's and Bosses you can kill for loot.

The "narrative" as it is of Fortnite Chapter 5: Season 1 is (near as I can tell) that Peely the Banana has been kidnapped by the Society (who serve as the current skins for this season and AI controlled bosses and NPC's on locations of the map.) And the map is littered with their fortresses with Jonesy (I guess the main character?) Going up against them to get his friend back. Which means there are a handful of locations in the current Fortnite Map that are just Boss bases. These are bunkers, and huge mansions and little outposts that you have to be careful around because once they know you're there they will just start spawning endless enemies to try and kill you, and the attention WILL draw enemy players. So you're shooting out cameras for XP and to keep them from beeping, avoiding turrets to keep from alerting guards and keep them from chewing up your health.

Guards already had the "?" and "!" system for showing if they detected you, despite having no inherent stealth mechanics in the game or any intention of introducing MGS. They didn't do this FOR an MGS tie in. There are recruitable companions and they can't speak so a way for players and enemies to detect if their companion "senses" an enemy player is to use the "?" and "!" system. While it doesn't mean that much without him. This is very clearly taken from Metal Gear, and as a result the alert system feels very natural around Snake.

In game modes where you have teams of two three or Four players, you get downed like Gears of War or Apex, and have to be revived. You can crawl and move. But players who are on their feet can pick you up and sling you over their back, or even yeet you to safety.

Enemy Players can do this too.

When I play Team modes by myself (I am alone, everyone else is in a team) I frequently pick enemies who wandered off of their pack and pick them off, tossing them somewhere their team mates can't get to or won't find them specifically to draw them in to their rescue.

Additionally there IS wildlife to hunt: Chickens, Frogs and Fish which give you medium effect healing items.

The game has items you can put on to "disguise yourself" like bushes, or snowmen during christmas that work EXACTLY like the card board boxes in MGS (though it's debatable if players are convinced by anything but the bush)

All of this was going on BEFORE Snake was unlockable. (I don't know if the camera's and bosses stuff existed before this season)

Which means that MECHANICALLY. Snake doesn't feel out of place at all in Fortnite.

It's super weird when a Xenomorph, or Spiderman, or a Ninja Turtle, or Goku, or a teen from My hero Academia, or Eleven from stranger things comes in and starts mowing people down with an assault rifle. The disconnect is part of the charm for better or worse, and it's both amusing and horrifyingly upsetting when you think about these characters sold as nothing but IP to get rich off of being so taken out of context from their character's intended art, themes and meaning.

It's just weird to see bright bubbly Mina from My Hero shooting people dead. Spiderman doesn't kill people, that's the Punisher, it's fucking weird to have Spiderman just gunning people down, if you get my gist.

It's super fucking weird to see these characters handle a fire arm and move around in a shooter. They feel less like themselves and more like what they are: A skin of a popular thing, plugged into a world to please fans and rake in money. It's fucking weird to see Spider-man holding a firearm.

It is NOT weird to watch Solid Snake do it. As a result of this, Snake kind of slips into the absurd world of Fortnite rather well.

It feels kind of cool strip snake of all like falling trail effects and just watch him super-hero sky dive toward a giant compound full of NPC's and land on the roof (It looks cooler in the dead of night but I didn't get a screenshot of it)

It's not weird to experience Snake in Fortnite's world handling Fortnite's mechanics. Because so many of the mechanics and the tone feels distinctly normal for Metal Gear Solid. This is not the first time Snake has been pawned out as a mascott to other properties.

It's weird as hell to watch Kratos blow a car up with a rocket launcher. That is not a part of his world, you see. It's NOT weird to watch Snake fire an RPG at anything. It's not weird to watch Snake do a bulk of the things he can do in Fortnite.

It's not weird to watch Snake run around a forest and shoot a frog or hunt a chicken for it's meat because we've played Snake Eater

It's not weird to hide in a bush as Snake:

It's not weird to watch snake shoot someone or Reload a fire-arm. The Snowy Mountains bases, the outposts, the big mansions and small cities the open world all feel like places Snake has been at home in, from Shadow Moses, to the Middle East, it's not unusual to see Snake* surrounded by girders and steps and concrete and cabins and tents and forrests etc. It's not weird to watch Snake pick someone up who's downed and carry them over his shoulder, or chuck them into a closet: We've seen this in MGS V: The Phantom Pain. Metal Gear Solid kind of invented a lot of these mechanics.

There isn't that much about Snake in the following footage seems out of place for Metal Gear Solid:

Snake doesn't feel out of place in fortnite. It might feel sacriligious for the biggest thing in gaming adding snake (with no cheeks I might add) to it's roster to be eyerolling or cringe. But Snake doesn't feel "too good" for fortnite. But he also doesn't feel like a total shill in fortnite either. A lot of the gear and missions and challengees to unlock him felt like a someone was asked to put together activities at a Metal Gear Solid themed birthday party (Use hiding spots. Shoot out 2 cameras. Fire an RPG, shoot silenced weapons, uses the disguise mechanics, travel in the disguise items. hack Trains or Vaults) the Emote could have easily been just the alert noise over Snake's head, but they put it on a freaking stick, Wile E Coyote style.

There's a weird Fortnite blend of "Lets make something as cheaply as possible in some places and yet give some things the love and attention that comes from making 5billion in revenue a year affords you." that shows up in everything they do. And they clearly put a lot more effort into this promotion than they did the Family guy stuff (not that I care one way or the other about Family guy I'm just calling it like I see it.) To be honest Snake has been shilled out to so many other games for cross promotion over the years this is hardly his first.

Snake has been blended with many things like Ape Escape, Smash Bros, and Monster Hunter. Seeing him along other games and even other characteres not of MGS's worldbuilding doesn't feel that odd. Snake has kind of left his "world" behind many times. Which is...kind of in keeping with Snake being this cipher? This character the player slips on. Snake is a character an icon but he's also this THING puppeted by us. A lot of games work to break this illusion to make us forget we're not Kratos, or We're not Nathan Drake but ever since Metal Gear Solid 1 Kojima's writing has been pretty clear there's "something" that drives snake. Not motivationally, but literally piloting him giving him what he needed to succeed (us). To put it simply. Snake has always been a bit Meta as a character. And it's hard to see liscenced characters (sold for up to 15 dollars a pop) as themselves when we're piloting them telling them to drink slurp juice out of jars, or swing a pickaxe or or sing "The Real Slim Shady" or do cutesy Jpop dances. All of this is to say, having played MGS 1 through TPP: nothing about this gameplay feels that out of character for Metal Gear aside from the cartoony art style. The look and feel of Fortnite naturally lends itself to having Snake as a Playable character in it. Narratively, Thematically, Fortnite is almost antithetical to Metal Gear Solid. But tonally, and mechanically, it feels in keeping with the series.

Part of this is just the fact that Kojima's games have always been ahead of the curve when it comes to what you can do in gameplay and so many of these things were adopted by gaming later that slotting Snake back into mechanics his games inspired just doesn't feel disjointed. So many games have copied Metal Gear Solid over the years and became main stream. MGS has also had it's own unique air owing to both Kojima's own unique style and the weirdness/humor brought about as the game tries very seriously to balance it's story and themes against poop jokes, and mechanics that are often very silly but very fun and a total detachment from the poe faced somberness snake goes for or is possibly trying to mock. This, overall is a chunk of what makes metal gear feel like metal gear. The mechanics of Fortnite feel eerily comparable to the mechanics of later Metal Gear games (especially MGS V) .

And the tonal disconnect between what Metal Gear games are doing as a plot, and the inherent nonsense the mechanics provide contrasting it, have always been a part of MGS and it's charm, and that's kind of what makes Fortnite the thing it is today? You have a very serious plot about war and the military and a gravely voiced man and then in the corner a Vampire man does a big dance, and large bi-pedal mechs moo like cows. It's why any time any popular thing is announced in fortnite it kind of becomes a joke. Very serious Rapper Eminem is in Fortnite, and has his personal OC Slim Shady as a playable skin, and he's shoving his hand in Pinata's and chugging slurp juice, it's kind of weird to see someone who takes themself so seriously dancing at the whims of whoever controls him. But that's been a core part of Metal Gear and the Metal Gear Solid Franchise, and the fandom forever. I dunno. I'm not trying to defend the fact that Fortnite is a center for companies to strip their IP of all love and meaning and sell it to us as pure nostalgia and profit. I'm just trying to say I was surprised by how weirdly normal (and to be honest kind fun) it felt to run around RPing Solid Snake in fortnite and I've been at it all day. As someone who originally didn't care one way or the other, and felt kind of cynical about such a beloved character being absorbed into this mess: I'm kinda glad he's here now.

*I know Snake and Big Boss (and by extension Venom/Punished Snake/Boss) are all different characters. But for the sake of this discussion I dipped in and out of talking about Solid Snake and "Snake" (any) as a whole in Metal Gear as a whole

#solid snake #metal gear solid #I've been editing and adding to this for hours I'm just going to push it out or I'll never post it #if it has errors grammatical or lore I'm not going to worry about it you get the gist

[heart-forge]

hey afaik this hasn't happened yet but don't feed my stuff into AIs, no matter what friendly neighbourhood corporation will put a silly hat on Crave (I routinely link to artists who can be paid to put Crave in the silly hat of your dreams). AI makes job searching, something that is already a Sisyphean nightmare, a billion times worse, and I am directly opposed to the idea of training a non sentient program (sentient probably wouldn't be better but as it is, "teach it to learn but not to think because then it might not spend 24 hours a day shitting out money" seems a little unethical) to shit out money for the most annoying people you can possibly think of. Chat bots, AI art, all of it could have a place in a better society that wasn't on pins and needles ready to exploit it in order to put people out of work, injure, maim, and steal.

This blog is unequivocally against the recreational use of AI, because it trains the AI to more robust which them allows for corporate and broad institutional misuse (because a company developing an AI doesn't care about generating fanfic for you for free, it cares about military and government contracts). AIs recognising human faces doesn't stop at making you into a silly painting, it actively harms people in war zones and at protests. AIs being able to recreate hyper realistic images from being trained on stolen art become propaganda machines for the system. At minimum, AIs being able to imitate human speech by being trained on dialogue and voice via writing will destroy jobs, if not something more insidious that it hasn't had the opportunity to showcase yet.

Stop hanging out with bots online.

#talkForge #when they ask for help that's when you can engage #until then leave them tf alone #this feels a lot like one of those stupid things people keep asking other people do not do that gets met with so much pushback #it's one thing to not have considered it until now but continuing to do so after being told multiple times that x behaviour is harmful #you'll live. find a new hobby. stop fucking talking to bots online god #so many people talking to that microsoft bot like give your head a shake

[northwest-cryptid]

i totally get the reasoning on your post and it seems really true, but then why do you think it generated the penises? or do you think they are not penises and we are simply seeing objects in the AI goop

I just wanna really quickly point out that this is EXACTLY the sort of questions I'm looking to answer and educate people on, so genuinely; thank you so much for asking.

I'm going to open with saying that while I don't know for certain, given that there's a ton of factors we can't possibly know without actually getting in touch with the person who generated the image; I will do my best to answer this with as much detail as possible.

So my best guess is that, simply put we're just seeing things. It's likely that, given the objects around the object in question; they simply told it to create objects.

A lot of objects that we see in Overwatch (such as the handles of hammers/swords and such) could easily be misshapen by AI to appear like a penis, especially when as pointed out by the commenter we sort of do associate Overwatch with porn/NSFW material.

My best reasoning for this is simply that it's unlikely the AI in question would generate a sort of one off occurrence without any other sort of "hint" or "evidence" of what kind of checkpoint it's running.

To put it simply, a lot of people have this idea that an AI itself "learns" things; that's not quite the case. In reality the AI is sort of a shell for a brain of sorts. That "brain" is called a Checkpoint, the checkpoint or sometimes called a "model" is essentially a point of reference for what words mean. That is the thing that learns, and when the AI needs to generate something it essentially references what the Checkpoint says something looks like.

What this means is that if we are to believe that the AI (Checkpoint) associates Overwatch with porn, it should have some kind of stylistic choice we can see in the art that would reflect that, outside of a one off penis in the corner of a bunch of stuff, which if I'm being honest; upon closer inspection doesn't even really look that much like a penis...

I mean, I understand where you're coming from if you think it looks that way but I think that's more on your own human brain if I'm being perfectly honest with you. Like yea I can see it too but I don't think that's what the AI was going for if I'm being real here.

Anyways I wanted to test my theory here, so I went to Civitai, a website for sharing checkpoints and the like; and found two checkpoints to compare the original against.

They are both highly rated at 4.8 rating though I will openly admit that the NSFW checkpoints has 34,000+ downloads while the seemingly SFW checkpoint only seems to have around 3,100+ so yes I understand that rating isn't exactly equal but never the less they're both highly rated checkpoints with thousands of downloads, of course the NSFW one is more popular; for our testing purposes that doesn't really matter.

Now I want to say this up front; as both of these checkpoints are actually merges (meaning they're made up of a bunch of smaller checkpoints merged together into a big one) it would be nearly impossible for me to source everything back and make sure everything is ethically sourced. I do not condone using unethically sourced checkpoints and only generated these images for the sake of example and education. Both checkpoints were deleted shortly after running these generations.

The first was Animerge, a seemingly safe for work checkpoint; and the second was Grapefruit, a NSFW checkpoint that also focused on anime.

I ran the original overwatch image that we are discussing through the controlnet canny system as a reference for both of these images and ONLY gave the AI the prompt "Overwatch" as to not create any sort of bias.

I gotta say as much as the results speak for themselves, I'll explain for those who don't really get it (that's fine no worries).

I feel like you can tell without me even telling you that the image on the left was generated by the SFW checkpoint, and the one on the right by the NSFW checkpoint. Not only do we see something more heavily resembling the original image on the left, but we see specifically that it left the man in the image intact. Where as with the image on the right, we can see this man got himself a bit of plastic surgery in the ass to basically become "thick Mercy" and we can additionally see the robot on the left became a wannabe D.Va with the lady on the right becoming something of a Tracer character from the looks of it, given a wider butt, and generally more pronounced shape. In fact the NSFW checkpoint almost entirely deleted the background, with only a few of the foreground debris being left behind but heavily altered.

So hey why is that? If all I prompted was Overwatch then that's all it had to go off of right? Well yes, exactly; the only thing either of these checkpoints has was Overwatch. Yet that which was trained on specifically NSFW images incorporated those features of anatomy into the image, likewise the SFW model seems to have latched onto Overwatch's general sci-fi vibe using the white, blue, yellow color scheme the game is sort of known for.

See this is what I mean when I say, I think we're projecting a bit onto the AI's thoughts here. First of all an AI can't actually "think" per se, so all that association stuff doesn't really make sense, it's going off tags not off what we as humans think of first when someone says overwatch. Most tags or color schemes or common traits around overwatch honestly probably aren't NSFW in nature. We just tend to latch onto the NSFW art/media around the game because it's what's well known to people.

So interestingly enough I really wanted to see if I could get the Grapefruit checkpoint to make something closer to the original, and after a few attempts this was the closest I got. You can clearly notice that the anatomy is STILL effected! The overly pronounced butts, and the fact it REALLY wants this guy to be Tracer giving him her hair and general color scheme.

We can also see that the oh so famous "penis" has become just another object in the pile of vaguely phallic shape. In fact, if we compare the butt of the original to the new butts the change in shape is REALLY obvious.

If we want to believe that the AI associated Overwatch with porn inherently, and that the checkpoint trained on pornographic material "on the internet, where the porn is" then we should see that reflected in how it handles the anatomy of these characters and we just don't.

Technically speaking there's a system called "inpaint" which allows you to specifically alter parts of an AI generated image using a different checkpoint, meaning it's possible theoretically for someone to paint over the characters with inpaint, and select a different; safe for work checkpoint that still has innocent virgin eyes untainted by "The Internet, You Know; Where The Porn Is™." However given how absolutely lazy the overall image is, I honestly can't bring myself to say that's what happened. Especially because at that point they could have simply painted over the penis and removed it. If they somehow didn't notice the penis shape, despite it's prominence; a penis still wouldn't have just been generated without the checkpoint specifically being aware of, and typically learning on porn; and there's no reason why it would appear there and have no semblance of NSFW material elsewhere if such a checkpoint was used.

the tl;dr of this is that while sure it's TECHNICALLY possible it's an AI generated penis; I HIGHLY doubt that's actually true. Simply put that's just not how AI works, and for that to be how the image came to be they'd have to have taken some weirdly specific precautions and care to un-NSFW the two characters and surrounding environment but specifically ignore/not see/leave the penis for some reason. I can't, in sound mind; convince myself that was the case.

So while I may not exactly know what it's meant to be 100%, or why it was created I cannot with any level of certainty say it is actually what people say it is. I think we're just all projecting what we find funny, or what we personally associate with Overwatch.

After all, have you considered the fact that given the prompt of "overwatch" it specifically is trying to generate the women in the cast? If we believe that it really associated overwatch with pornography; it doesn't make sense that a penis of all things would be the image it chooses to create to represent that. Not when even across multiple image generations it's consistently trying to make the man into either Mercy or Tracer, and if it's given no image prompting to go off of, it simply creates some kind of tracer lookalike, you know; like a tracer who accidentally fell in some acid and her face is melting off, but I digress. I just can't bring myself to believe that any of the claim is actually true given my knowledge of how AI works, that being said; I think it's incredibly funny that it made some kind of dumb phallic shape because the people who generated it were too lazy to even think about having an actual artist touch up the picture in the slightest and fix the GLARING problems with it.

When I said, "if the commenter is some form of authority on the matter I'd love for them to tell me which AI it was, or what website it's trained on." That was genuine, because you know; with that information you'd likely actually be able to get to the bottom of this.

At the end of the day, AI can't REALLY think for itself, it doesn't know how to learn anything a person doesn't directly teach it. So unless it was shown a penis, and taught what a penis was specifically; it wouldn't be able to generate a "penis" but it could generate something that resembles something that could be a penis if you squint at it and have the thought on your brain.

Genuinely hope that is a satisfactory answer to such a question.

[stopaifromharming]

AI is so much more dangerous than we think

"AI is not going to take out jobs, anytime soon"

but it is taking our jobs, the scriptwriters, the authors, the actors who didn't give consent to have their face stolen, the artist and poets.

"AI is innovative"

yes it is. but why shouldn't it be regulated?

"I don't care about the artists, they will always be around"

what about when those same artist hve opportunities taken away because some lazy person in the internet couldn't be bothered to take their skill?

"its cool though"

its not cool when its about you. for art, maybe. its not so 'cool' when you find yourself in court, facing charges for a crime you never committed. its not 'cool' when leaked videos and pictures of something life changing that never actually happened cause a social unrest. its not cool when it hits the grid, the infrastructure, and makes us vulnerable to hackers.

im not saying AI isn't innovative, it is. it is amazing that the human mind could've created something so similar to a human brain, to the point where we can have conversations and it can make its 'own' art and poetry. but like any other dangerous human creation, it should be monitored. it should be regulated.

there are women and children right now who have incredibly inappropriate pictures of them floating around in the internet, because someone used AI to fake them. there are people getting scammed because hackers are taking their loved one's voices to manipulate their emotions and get money. there are artist, writers, actors and poets who are losing their craft to a machine, and in the meantime losing their jobs.

is this what society has done to us? water us down so much to the point where we choose comfortability instead of innovation and free thought?

it has. society has done this to us and im not surprised because like everything else, nothing contains love anymore, nothing contains craft and time. just whats more quick, easier, and cheaper to make.

AI doesn't only affect those in the arts. as much as some of y'all hate to admit it, it affects you too. AI affects ever single one of us, and if you don't think we're going to become incredibly dependant in the future of it, you're terribly mistaken. if a few teenagers can use AI to ruin their classmate's life by leaking nudes, what do you think proffesional hackers can do to our infrastructure? our voting system? our phones? there has to be an AI in everything, snapchat, instagram, google. rechase it. ignore it. speak out against it. if we don't use it, we won't encourage it.

AI is so, so dangerous. one faked image, and you could be convicted of a crime you never even did. one fake video, and the people can start protesting, social unrest can rise, chaos will release. AI has no accountability. it invades privacy, it erodes our creative thinking. its misinformation and manipulation. it tells us that we don't need to try, we don't need to even think for us to be able to make something that once require love.

i think AI could be something wonderful, it could help so many lives. but why does it have to make movies and poems, while humans still work in the mines? we have to push our government to put regulations on this new beast. we have digged and found something shiny, but we don't know what it is. we have to be careful. we have to put restrictions before we regret it later on.

i care about humans and i hope you do to. please consider if using your snapchat ai to do your homework is truly helping society, is truly helping yourself. think twice before generating an image.

AI is what we make it. let's not make it something we'll regret.

#ai #ai generated #stop ai #i hate ai #artificial intelligence #chatgpt

[skyecreature]

Artificial Intelligence.

TL;DR. I think AI and Neural Networks are really cool as a technology, but the way they are currently being used is terrible and needs to be stopped.

You don't have to read this, I just wanted to get my thoughts down on paper. Read more block because it's long.

I don't know if there's a formalized definition, but, for the most part, AI is any program or system that can create the illusion of decision-making.

In recent times, it's been used to refer generative AI specifically, but many things could be classified as AI. Minecraft's mobs have to make decisions on how to move. In fighting games, a CPU opponent must decide how to approach the player. Both of these and many others I, and many others, have called AI before. "AI opponents." "The cow's AI is making it spin on the fence." (Weeee!)

More recently, AI is closely employed alongside Neural Networks and Machine Learning. Which is like, basically just a digital simulation of exactly how our brains work. Which I genuinely think is really really cool! You're creating something that can appear smart from only feeding it random numbers and telling if is it's doing good or bad. And from there it eventually becomes something. It's a beautiful execution of mathematics.

Now, somebody realized that, finding data to compare to for this "good" or "bad" was pretty hard to find in bulk. So people made their own data sets. Until those weren't enough. Now, we steal artwork. And herein lies my first problem with AI, as does most people. It's one thing to look at another person's artwork and be like: "oh, that's cool, I want to try copying their art style." I would have no issue with that. (And even so, if I try to copy someone's style, I will always say who.) But that's not what it is. It's taking someone's (or rather, many people, but that doesn't make this any better), and sitting down in a metaphorical classroom to study this artwork as your one and only basis in "learning to draw."

This is basically beating a dead horse, but, like, it's very very sad for me to see something I cared deeply about, (I loved watching Sethbling's videos on 'training a network to beat Mario Bros.' and similar videos, long before the whole AI thing), and now it's become perverted because it's built on a throne of lies, as the saying goes.

My second problem with AI, and while still an echo of much I've seen elsewhere, slightly less so, is that it seems to be a perfect insistence on it being generative, when you could use this technology so much better. I want AI to assist artists, not work against them. What if your paint bucket tool could tell when there was a 1-pixel gap in the fill and, even if not "smart closing" the gap, at least be able to find where it is, because those can be bloody annoying to spot. Or what if you could pull two strokes apart that you put on the same layer 20 minutes ago and didn't notice until now? What if you could just tap in an area to mask your shading brush without carefully lassoing the part you want? There's so many many better ways this technology could be getting used, and I hate it. I hate it so much, that the way it's implemented is "replace," and not "help."

IDK if I'm really trying to make a point with this. I just wanted to get my thoughts out. If you disagree or think I could have worded something better, please leave a reply.

[ask-the-cosmic-duo]

"..... Super Armor, huh? But will it save lives..." Aurora looked down at her own military vest before continuing, "Too strong means too heavy and bulky.. you lack mobility. Infantry will die if it can't get out of the way on time." She leviated a small looking sturdy armor nearby before crushing it easily with magic. "Against explosions and ultra powered magical attacks? How does it help? It needs some kind of exoskeleton... and we dont have the materials nor the tools to create those sadly.. it's only a concept art today in fantasy games. Here, at least."

"Well... racing arcade games are more popular in the imperial capital than FPS games.. same goes for fighting games. We have those tourneys once in a while.. with prize money. We are still far behind in technology than most worlds.. Our Empress doesn't like technology here to move too fast, because she is worried technology will replace magic and flight, and of course mother nature. She worries it will create a dystopian world where corporations benefit."

Aurora looked across the room, at the clock, "looks like I have to make the magic brew for the Empress soon. She's sick.. since the last great battle, and not in a good way." She sighed as she pulls out a old magical cure book...

"I must find the Prince.."

"Oh, well that's easy! The armor's linked to your nervous system! It moves in sync with you, as if it's a part of your body, and even provides force multipliers to allow for much more impressive feats of strength!" Stella trilled softly.

"The Mjolnir armor was developed to armor the Spartan-IIs, and use many different highly-advanced technologies to function, like miniaturized nuclear fusion technology, a special liquid metal crystal layer within the undersuit that is a key part of the suit's mobility, energy shielding starting with the Mark V, and an additional crystal layer under the metal plating that allows for the integration of a smart AI, also introduced with the Mark V."

"Basically, it's obscenely expensive, but also unbelievably effective when paired with someone that won't kill themselves from the armor overreacting to their smallest movements." She paused. "Yeah, uh, if that alone didn't make it clear, it takes a heavily augmented soldier, like a Spartan, to effectively use a set of Mjolnir armor. But, if you give them that armor, and the proper training, they're nearly unstoppable!"

"And you want this armor for yourself? You don't have any augmentation, much less anything like that of a Spartan."

Her ears folded somewhat. "I'm... still figuring that part out." It took her a moment to process what was said next, and she perked up when she did. "Huh? Oh, right. Yeah, she's not far off. I mean, look at America in the human world." She giggled, seemingly having already moved on. "I don't mind tech replacing some things, though. Cars are a blast to drive, despite how dangerous they can be in the wrong hooves. You just gotta make sure you aren't the wrong hooves."

Sol nodded. "Stellar's really good at racing games, though. Knowing her, she'd dominate any competition she's put in once she's used to the controls and knows what works. It's like she can enter the zone at any time, completely at will. It's weird."

Stella tilted her head as Aurora talked about her plans, looking curious. "Sick? Sick how? What happened? And, uh... can we help?" She received a look from Sol, likely about to say again that they might not be authorized to help. She ignored it, though.

#Equestria Cross #EqX: AuroraVerse 1 #Ask #The Starry Traveller #Stellar Spirit #Solar Ray #Lore #Nerd Talk #Stella's a nerd #Maybe I should give her glasses #Maybe some nerd glasses

[causticsunshine]

if he’s gonna claim to be a man of the people, indie artist, he needs to do better. imma need him to be more vocally progressive than this bullshit.

hiii anon i'm going to reply to you and some other anons i got on this topic as well, just because this has now turned into a Discussion and it seems people may be taking my initial annoyance at any potential interest louis may have in AI—and whatever direction that potential interest may go, but that is hopefully largely anti AI in regards to how it's largely being used rn—as possibly misdirected due to the space he was in being titled 'Is AI the end of humanity?' (+ comparing two differently functioning AI engines)

but i want to reply to you first, and say: yes!! it just doesn't make sense to me how someone who preaches artistic integrity, being true to yourself and your work, yk, that the Big Boss Man Indie Artist himself, could have any vested interest in tools that are used to literally steal art for profit, unless it was to try and find a way to make these tools obsolete!

now, to the other anons i got, which had to say this:

(my reply to these inquiries btw will likely give more support to my reply to our original anon on this post as well! also put it behind a cut because i get a bit wordy soz)

as the space was over before i even saw the post—or i at least couldn't access it, simply couldn't find it, etc.—i couldn't listen in and find out what exactly the discussion was deducing. while it would seem by the first half of the space's title that they were just talking about potential pros and cons to AI usage, the subtitle of the space, putting musty elon's AI machine up against ChatGPT, made/makes me a bit more apprehensive of how the subject of AI was being discussed.

(unless, of course, the goal was still to discuss the differences between two different AI tools, as well as their individual pros and cons and how both may end up relating to the first part of the space's title: is AI the end for us?

because i think it is really important for us to discuss the ways we can use different forms of AI to help us, as well as the ways we can use it to hurt us.)

while i definitely appreciate the anon in the first screencap for pointing out that while AI (as it's being used most currently) in general is still very much bullshit, that ChatGPT does have potential to be helpful as a writing aid and did offer them help in school, i'm still apprehensive of how it was being discussed in the space, and what pros and cons were possibly being touched on. especially if this was louis', or really anyone else's, primary education source.

(also while i do know at its core what ChatGPT is, i haven't personally used it, so i can't vouch for its overall efficiency or even it's morality as a writing AI tool!)

i say this because i personally already have a fundamental issue with AI tools 9.8 times out of 10, because of how these current big AI tools work, are being marketed and used, and what purpose they truly end up serving in the end, which is: to data mine and steal from artists/creatives/people putting their work up on the public internet to turn a profit without doing any of the actual work!

plus, as someone who actively draws and writes, puts their work out on the internet for consumption, and who's been trying to do freelancing for years—as well as someone who has also had their work stolen on more than one occasion before! without the help of machines!—i know firsthand how much most artists are underpaid and how much our professions and accomplishments are belittled, all while being demanded to work constantly for people to largely enjoy our content for free.

so tldr: even if louis was in that space just to hear about the dangers of AI, or how one system may be better/worse than another, the pros and cons of both, what have you, i don't really think you can blame anyone for being nervous of him having any vested interest in the subject due to how he approached NFTs, and i say this because there's a lot of crossover between people who utilize(d) NFTs for capital gains, and people who use AI for the same reason, as well as people who are trying to market AI as they did NFTs: as a business model rather than huge source of creative theft (and in some cases, data mining too!)

i will say though, in argument to AI, that at LEAST AI art theft machines can/could be altered and thus used as a tool to help the communities and people they're currently stealing from, such as being used to help create art references, alter your own works in a new method of editing or bolstering your end product, even protecting from art theft (which i believe a university tech team somewhere in the US is actually working on rn!)

if louis were to clarify that he's wholly against the misuse of AI as a pocket-lining theft module, i'd gladly redact my earlier statement and proudly thank him for educating himself on the matter and speaking up against it! like, i'd genuinely love that! but, because of how much crossover exists between AI and NFT users and how he initially approached NFTs in a pro-model sort of way (from what we were able to see), it makes me honestly exasperated to see him engage at all in discussion on AI, without true clarification on how that discussion is being put across.

especially seeing as how much he promotes originality and being proud of one's own work and ideas.

#soz i switched the desktop so i could type easier and now tumblr won't let me edit my draft from mobile so i had to start #all over again so sorry for making you all wait for a reply :( #also kinda copied what i said on twitter over here as well bc i think i nailed the point home better there than i did in my #original reply here? #anyway i'm done discussing it like ik he's not gonna clarify what he was doing or his takeaway so i'm just gonna #drop the subject move on and we'll see what happens #as i have to go to bed very soon too i just want to say if i get any more replies on this in the morning #specifically replies that are aggressive or confrontational etc etc i will be deleting because #i think this conversation has already been drawn out enough and i don't think it's ultimately worth the energy being put forth #anyway i'm sending these anons and the rest of you good vibes and let's focus on something nicer now #anon #answered #discourse #< just because this is very wordy and mildly argumentative

[greenpanda-djg]

My issue with AI art.

Here's some things I've heard/read online from ai bros etc and here's what conclusions I came to. I have no idea how AI actually works same way as how I don't know how every intenational law of by heart. I've seen people who HAVE understanding of what it is from both sides the for and against.

But I'm one of those people who doesn't read the terms of service before I agree to acess my new iphone so- from the information and what others have said this is what I think.

Like crypto currency, nfts and pryamid schemes it reeks of scam,

Its easy to abuse. There is no safety nets for anyone involved and just seems as another fancier complicated way of saving an image of google and posting it on instagram for likes and follows.

"It's learning from Artists, not stealing."

Okay where is this LIST of artists that donated their artworks to the system? Where is the credit.

Instead of a # Ross/Draws or # Loish/ instead it only tags as the art style.

Because no one can OWN an art style instead of the artist used to generate this image its #pastel art. And no one can own an art style so its used as a ploy to AVOID criticism. To comes across as better to beg for forgivness than permission by using art style and being sneaky about it makes it come across as they are blatently stealing and plainly sorry they got caught not for the act. If you really care about artists you would credit the ones you stole to make a gross amalgamation of instead of reducing all that artists work and labour to an art style.

"Its an art tool."

Its too [how can I say] open world. There is a difference between posting your art on an account then deleting it later, but the program once an image is posted is open to everyone. Instead of being a tool like design doll, or making your own brushes on an art program its like anyone can invade and highjack it. Its not an indiviual program once its in the date because if you upload anything your are giving it permission to take that image and 'learn' from it. And with that- from the previous statment. Did any artist CONSENT to their art being put into this program? If I saved an image of Iyla kushinov and posted that in the AI even tho I am NOT that person does that not count as being unethical?

"Its public domain."

only artists seem to know this, and none artists have this entitlment that I've noticed. But there is a give or take system, If I upload on a website I trust there wont be too much abuse but I'm aware that yeah someone can save/take it but no matter what I know I can keep drawing or show the proof of my art in WIPS and concept stages. Me posting on a website it has its own contracts and agreement, in doing so by uploading making content getting engagment actually builds up revenue for the website as both consumer and creator its a give or take relationship. Even with artists online we learn from each other but understand the logical agreement to not 'steal' but take inspiration. I can look up ethan becker and study his work but maybe he can come across an art piece of mine and might copy the colour pallete. Its a beneficial enviorment where everyone is on the same page.

Even tho its public artists have a history of being protective of their work, no one likes art thiefs/reposters or tracers even to the point of calling people out and even cancelling bigger artists for tracing or straight up stealing.

Also if its public domain, then where does the line stop? Does that mean I can take AI art and take that as my own, its public domain? That means any ai art I like I can just save the image, change it slightly and take it as my own. Want to complain? its public domain.

"Its no different than reference." There is something called HUMAN ERROR. We make mistakes, even if we are looking at a reference hand eye coordination sometimes doesn't project this clearly. So many artists draw things that look nothing like what they had in their head but come up with something they ended up liking. We cant make a perfect copy, or even looking at references from the past, memories are a fickle thing and we misremember or think something looks one way or another.

I could think of a circle, then by drawing from memory create an oval. Then it progresses into a new shape intiarlly. Just by mistakes, by doing it wrong by accident.

Ai is designed as a computer, numbers and codes to do it as it is. There is no time for error or even experimentation. Halfway through a painting artists CHANGE their mind and change the colour, or experiemnt with brushes an ai wont do that. They would do what majority of other artists have created to make it look nice.

Ai is as limited in this, and without experimentation it just wont work.

For example, realistically, every artists is told anime art isn't 'real art' and not to use it. And yet its the most popular art style constintly used and even making its way into animation.

We were told to use red green blue. But artists use cmyk instead.

We were told that red and green are complimentary colours and yet we always pear red with Teal or blue and make purple.

Its not the same because like free guy, even if you add a ton of shit into the image that small 'code' is the source of an art piece that had no consent to being there and its unmovable and inchangable. No different that a diformed collage with too many fingers and chair legs.

"It doesnt Steal art jobs."

It doesn't steal, but it does change the market value. Art prices have dropped from $80.00 to twenty, the more quantity or easier it is to get something makes it harder to make a living as others will be forced to make their work cheaper to get commisions. Its going back on humane working and almost forces artists into unworkable enviorment to keep up with commisions keep it consistent and to be payed by the hour and enough money to earn a living. Its basic marketing 101 the more quantity the lower the value.

Its already used in conventions used in spaces when most artist sell their artworks/prints.

As well as video game developers are now using it as a shortcut to make art and even imply that human art is obsolete.

source:

Legal aka daylight robbery is what it is.

I know this might come across as wrong and not a complete comparison, but the awful condictions proffiting of labours of others work and taking all the gain without lifting a finger, makes it feel like artists are more like sweet shops. Getting pennies for doing all the work and getting NOTHING in return.

And the worst dangerous part.

The dangers of Ai, including Deep fakes, ai voices, proffiting of dead actors.

E.g Deep fake of robert downey and Tom holland in Back to the future.

From a glance you cant tell, with time AI will IMPROVE.

Look not to be a nutter, but with the way the internet is going this is a discussion to be had. With deep fakes, ai generated voices taking real photos and blending them together. It sounds fun and non-threating. But I can't help but think, with how...lax companies are when it comes to the porn industry and other really messed up stuff.

And the thought of so many kids on tik tok, their videos photos selphies then add onto ai generations to create certain types of content. Either to add their faces on a model or to change the face to make it harder for anyone to detect.

For example, if someone posts their girlfriend on only fans and profits of that video in revenge p/rn and other things happening, would the deep fakes make it harder to detect CP and other stuff will ai consider that and would people who are really detestable immedietly think of doing that?

I'm uncomfrotable talking about this, but giving that it IS a possibility - that there is no safety nets with AI, that it admits on the tik tok anime filter app it was taking your selfies and taking it without consent.

Source: Tik Tok app accused of data mining, stealing personal information.

Already the internet is a wild west of a landscape where so many things slip under the radar. Such as your email adress being taken and sold to the highest bidder and constantly recieving spam mail >.<

And the other best part, tampering with evidence. If improved you can get someon conviced of anything with an audio of a confession.

And last note.

Artistic expression, of freedom. Trying to monetise, and calling it a democracy that art is now reduced as less than human and we need to get "Real jobs." Makes you realise how much everyone looks down on artists.

But most art has mostly been used as a form of protest, expression, a call out, satire and something used as a tool to critic 'society' to reduce that feels like some dystopia type shit.

At the end of the day, I dont ai will work. There are TOO many holes in it and its too open a program. I'll admit that I agree its calling out artists for drawing the same anime picture over and over because if I can't tell its ai and all art looks the same, means that everyone IS pretty much being stagnent in artistic expression I'll admit as a whole art has gotten stagment and complacent in its style so to seperate from AI might actually make people go out there way to be indivdual.

I doubt AI wont have mistakes, would you watch a movie knowing a BOT wrote the script? I wouldn't.

Sure you can tick the right boxes but it wont hit the soul, its a quick fix but as time goes on you'll realise how lacking it is and it'll affect everyone in the long run. Take a look at movies, media, video games. Most have either gone on hiatus or not as good as they used to be, both from nostalgia but also the lack of stimuation that humans need to be ingaged is missing and makes everyone bored, and prone to being more annoyed for their time being wasted.

AI art sounds great, but like Onceler cutting all his trees down, the long term has too many issues that arent being addresed.

Already most AI bros and others overly complicate and make statments that make it seem as if they are just agreeing with anything for free art but dont realise that it deserves criticism.

And yes artists have had issues with AI and instead of listening to IMPROVE this so called 'art tool' just steam roll over artists and tell them to shut up and accept it. Is another reason why artists think AI sucks and anyone affiliated with it is just scum.

Sam does art generators VS copyright.

An artist DRAWING on a livestream had her progress stolen completed by an AI bro and THEY the Ai bro tried to accuse the artist of stealing their work.

Source

Heres is Loish opinion on AI art.

Now there are people who steal peoples work and 'finish it' with ai and take full credit. Its just more fires in this space first tracers, reposters and art thiefs NOW aI theifs who then accuse the artist of stealing. [How is AI postive when its filled with scumbags like this???]

Then an artist gets accused of being ai and is then told to CHANGE THE artstyle oh sure we'll accomodate the robot, we're hurting its feefees by stealing its unique artstlye.

The fact that AI was a TOOL TO HELP ARTISTS feels like a knife stabbed in the gut and then they have the nerve to say "Why are you upset? Stop bleeding your being dramatic."

But what else is worse is copyright.

As artists online, we have a protection of use to create fanart/fiction/videos without being sued by disney from drawing such characters. By strangling AI to protect OUR content can easily double back on use and make it diffuclt for us to make fanart/get engagment and might lose our space.

As of now the world is getting smaller and more cramped and its going to be difficult to navigate. But with the way people go on, and have no comprehensive thinking, we have to simplify and dumb things down and draw a line in the sand the right/wrong left or right.

I'm against AI it sucks. And anyone who has any other opinion is complacent and part of the problem. If that makes you angry your part of the problem. And dont bother talking to me my opinion wont change.

#ai #a #i #aiart #ai art #AI #AIART #AI ART #ART #ai art generator #i fucking hate ai #aiartcommunity #ai image #ai artwork #ai art community #ai art discourse #ANTI-AI

[xxlovelynovaxx]

AI discourse is infuriating.

Yeah, that's what art is too, but the human brain has vastly many more connections than any supercomputer we have access to and has abilities that we haven't determined how to program yet, like the ability to choose to discard data based on critical thought. Every art piece ever made put thousands of artists into a blender and pulled out little bits of inspiration - style, use of color and shapes, the ideas within the art - and made them untraceable via the transformations of the new artist.

There's criticism to be made about AI, sure - predominant among them that AI are not sapient in the same way we are, and therefore can be both biased and exploited by horrible people. But there is no way you can define art that doesn't exclude human art. There are no laws you can make prohibiting AI art that won't infringe on fanworks especially.

Ah, yes, the psuedo-intellectual "I don't care that the problem is people and not the tool because the tool can easily be used for harm, so I'll destroy it as if that'll fix the problem". So, if you succeed, what then? You destroy the next tool those people come up with? You play a war of proxies, never bothering to address the people leaving a trail of carnage in their wake via the actual material harm they use their tools to cause before they are destroyed?

Our medical system is set up to make it incredibly easy to practice eugenics. Every chronically ill person I know, myself included, has years, usually even decades, of being denied care, neglected, and abused, before accessing effective diagnosis and treatment, and that's if you're lucky. If you're fat, nonwhite, trans - in any way a minority - you better hope what you have isn't counting down your life on a clock, because if it is, gatekeeping of medical care ensures the clock will reach zero multiple times over before you find one of the rare doctors actually willing to help you.

So should we destroy medicine? Yes, medicine, not the medical system. Because when you blame AI for the legal system surrounding it that allows its abuses, you are not addressing the systemic issues at all. You are taking what could be a tool for good and blaming it for its own misuse. Or are you forgetting as much as any techbro that there is no actual intelligence in AI?

(To further the metaphor, medicine can also be used to maliciously actively harm people itself, beyond the systemic issues. Yet the use of AI and medicine to directly harm people both are rare. Doctors purposely poisoning their patients is so rare as to make a sensationalist headline. Where's the AI directly interpersonally doing harm that would serve to help prove the above user's point, outside of systemic usages involving systemic sociopolitical injustice?)

This person has it right. Techbros had me swing strongly anti-AI for a good while. Anti-AI people are swinging me nearly as hard in the opposite direction. The strength and vehemence with which you cling to your arguments with nearly religious fervor is revealing the flaws in the structural integrity of those same arguments.

It's clear you're missing the major problems with AI when you say these things. "AI is bad because it nonconsensually uses the work of artists". Why? Why is that bad? Fanworks do that. What's the difference?

Oh, right. Profit. AI driving PROFIT to big corporations who did not seek the permission of those in the training data sets who need the money generated by their art to survive, not to fund syperyachts. That's what's bad. Yet not a mention of profit, money, or the evils of capitalism anywhere.

So many people have latched onto "AI is bad" with the same unquestioning loyalty that is the single largest driver of problems in leftist spaces. It is the same thing that drives people to mindlessly spout antisemitic conspiracy theories, to engage in lookism against bigots, to treat schizospec people as dangerous and clusB people as abusers, to condemn kink, fetish, and paraphilia in a positively christofascist display of sex negativity, to parrot transphobic rhetoric against "acceptable targets" such as plurals, neurodivergents labeled 'creeps' due to their ND traits, and other related groups.

Put simply, it's an utter lack of critical thought.

And you know what? I have respect for the people I've seen who've clearly given critical thought to it and arrived at conclusions that I disagree follow from the arguments they've made. I still might get annoyed by them, but there's a world of difference between that and the just... quite honestly, "faith" driving the stock most people put into these arguments.

Most people have simply bought the leftist tagline of the week and swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. They don't know why AI is "bad", it just is. And sure, they might regurgitate the same simple arguments against them with as little thought as they say "AI is bad". But the holes in those arguments that a truck can be driven through betray that they are just vomiting back up the selling points they've fed on, satisfied with a substanceless meal.

I'm not anti-AI. I'm also not pro-AI. I'm just annoyed as fuck about the drivel that is AI discourse, and the refusal to have nuance that even some of my most respected nuance-enjoyers on this site display on this topic. Maybe we could all step back from the rabidity the annoying-ass techbros have more than earned and examine the actual programs that make up AI instead of the assholes using them, and have an actual conversation about it?

[sonoda-oomers]

i think it was shanspear on youtube that raised this point that really stuck with me. it might be impossible to have productive conversations about AI when there's still so much profit incentive behind it.

like people are not that naive. they can acknowledge how exciting it could be to make an image from their imagination with the help of a machine. they can see the interesting and thought provoking potentials of machine generated art. i doubt i'm the only one who thinks the AI art = evil mindset has a bit too far especially when it's led to more kneejerk reactions against machine calculated tech that has existed since forever like video game npc behaviors. all of the conversations online feel so jarring when real world consequences actually happen like adobe kneeing in on the topic to tighten the noose on copyright laws to profit corporations even more. when it comes to the everyday person arguing on the internet, both sides are being played

and then somebody who heard about the adobe bullshit sees the writers and actors strike demanding against AI and opposes that bc now suddenly anti-AI is bad

and the thing is i can't really blame that person nor the anti-AI artists who probably supported the adobe bullshit before they knew the outcome. bc like. AI rapidly taking over really came out of nowhere to the average person and i think it's really unfair to expect people to immediately know the ins and outs of it. it's like when nfts were popping and artists were suddenly expected to navigate ideas from fields they have no knowledge of to legit culty mentalities, they're expected to know so much just to argue with some guy who doesn't know the first thing about what makes a drawing nice to look at. can you really blame every artists for not being able to write dissertations on how AI works and why they think it's illegitimate and should be regulated? they're busy actually making art and managing 14 social media accounts at once to keep themselves relevant and in the eyes of potential client so they can affording fucking rent. if they're presented copyright laws as a crutch to get this problem out of their mind of course they're going to take that as an argument, and may even support it.

like hell back in the nft days japanese artists got sold the system as a way to really combat disrespectful usage of their art by other people when in truth it did none of that, the market in fact encouraged theft.

ignorance is objectively bad, but at the same time can you really blame them when these techs keep seemingly pop out of nowhere and spawn societal issues and artists feel like now they have to have a stem degree and become a fucking humanitarian to tell people to Stop. when the simple fact is it really fucking sucks to work on your craft for so many years, to actually put in effort and spirit to do a good job, and then find out your potential clients would be fine with what a machine took 5 seconds to spit out. while artists are arguing with little twitter gremlins gloating to them about how artists are nothing compared to AI, some publications are already using AI instead of commissioning illustrators, and in every industry people are legit getting replaced by AI bc it costs less and it saves the suits at the top from having to treat people like people. and then you realize you can't really argue against the fact that human CAN be replaced. but you know just because it's true doesn't mean that it's good and should be allowed to continue. and no matter what opinion you hold there's corporations and agents and pr people left and right waiting to weaponize your feelings because there's money to be made money money money. the money that artists already weren't making before fucking algorithms could do their job for much less in return.

like i just wanna fucking draw man. and i think i'm allowed to hope to make a living from the skills i have. a few months ago posts kept coming out about how to watermark your art and use services to make sure really sure 100% sure this time that their art won't be added to a dataset. people delete their art after hearing about the theft, not knowing it's already been included in the dataset and there it will remain. do you know how fucking exhausting that is? there's a reason not everybody became a scientist or a programmer, we can never not live in a reality where we're not depending on other people to excel in what we can't and trusting that they're doing their job well. and then one day some guy in tech decides we're actually done depending on artists for being artists now, we want to make the money that they could make. every AI user can't help but think people with anti-AI criticism are attacking them personally. and it's not even those AI users that directly caused hollywood to want to screen actors' likeness to make a robot do their job forever and make execs so much fucking money.

#spud.txt

[grave-c]

more ramblings on AI as I procrastinate during burnout:

my opinion has not completely changed, but my hostility is starting to dial back in certain cases.

AI art (DALL-E, Midjourney, Stable Diffusion) generators are still easy for me to be in protest of because it's use case is way too specific. I really don't get why I would prompt the generator when I can prompt an artist to that artist's benefit. The divorce of imagery and expression of self / skill remains my core concern, but my other thoughts on the matter are still saved for that super secret video essay that will never come out. ooOooOoo - basically, I have no ideas on legislation against AI art that doesn't involve the FCC making things 100 times worse. it's difficult now to valuate my own art in the context of the production line industry standard art singularity, so commissions are a non starter for me. With those factors combined it's hard as an artist to not feel in "checkmate". The only person on this planet I can really draw for now is myself, and I hope that's enough to last.

using AI art in my own workflow is not something I've really dived into, not explicitly out of protest, but because the tools available today are already extremely good even without AI? like, I understand the use case AI art could play in making "assets" if it's like a texture or skybox that people will see for like 2 seconds but still, the tools for making art / textures / images are already extremely kitted out even without datasets as a spring board. there is a tool concept I've seen where AI might be able to color lineart which actually sounds useful in the context of animation. and it also sounds like a concept that an artist was in the room for? as in: let's use AI to address a practical issue that artists deal with, not here's a draw the rest of the fucking owl machine.

also in the voice of Joker from the Harley Quinn TV series: Blender Guru theorized an AI tool for retopology years ago, I want my goddamn retopology AI solver Bruce!

Now. chatGPT (text based AI, language models) on the other hand... are becoming increasingly hard to ignore. yes, while it too can be used as a plagiarism machine or a 20 minutes left to submit your essay machine - it's use case (compared to AI art) is like way more versatile, like by a factor of 100. The way that I can utilize it like a productivity tool, the way that I can ask it to make it's own filing system, the way that I can use it to prompt me as an artist

the way that I ran out of ideas and straight up just asked it to write the rest of this post in the style of Daria.

Oh, great. Another post about ChatGPT and its "cool, niche" features. Because nothing screams cool and niche like an AI language model, right?

But hey, I'll play along. If you're a writer, ChatGPT can give you writing prompts. Yay. As if we all haven't seen those cheesy "writing prompts for creatives" posts a million times before. And for designers, ChatGPT can suggest color schemes. Woohoo. Because apparently, designers can't come up with color palettes on their own.

But wait, there's more! ChatGPT can also help with branding and marketing. Because who needs actual creative talent when you have an AI to do it all for you? And if you're struggling with social media content, ChatGPT can suggest ideas. Because apparently, the answer to "lack of creativity" is just to outsource it to an AI.

And the best part? ChatGPT can also help you stay organized. Because who needs a good old-fashioned to-do list when you have an AI to remind you of everything you need to do?

Look, I get it. ChatGPT can be a useful tool. But let's not act like it's some kind of creative savior. At the end of the day, if you want to be a truly great creative, you need to put in the work and come up with your own ideas. Don't rely on an AI to do it for you.

LA LA LA LA LA LA

#text post #shitpost

[samedmunds]

My litany thoughts on 1999 cult classic strategy video game Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri

Alpha Centauri is a game of the early Civilization variety from the EA golden age and ranks very highly in my top ten. While you probably heard of it if you were playing video games around the turn of the century, I've found members of my age cohort to be tragically unfamiliar with this masterpiece.

Alpha Centauri is an unofficial sequel to Civilization II, a game where the only way to way to win is either completely eliminate all competitors to the last city or, rather more easily, send a spaceship loaded with colonists to the title star system. Shortly after leaving home, the ship loses contact with Earth, which would make sense to a player of Civilization II where the bonuses to science and trade from democracies evaporate when technology ends, upon which point all the AIs revolt and become militant fundamentalist theocracies and climate change rapidly destroys the planet, leaving the player with an endgame that is literally 1984. Either way, when the already strained ship arrives at the Alpha Centauri system an unknown partisan assassinates the captain of the UNS Unity and the population fractures into seven opposing factions before firing the colony pods and exploring an inconveniently hostile planet.

The player starts here, in typical Civ fashion: a scout, settler, and absolutely no technology to speak of. That isn't to say you are a bunch of primitives, all your units start out with some approximation to modern guns and judging by the amazing quotes and wonder videos your society is well beyond the 21st century--more on the story later. The gameplay is incredibly well-balanced in spite of its age and quirks (with the exception of the freight-train progression of Yang). Rapid early expansion as the bountiful Peacekeepers may leave you at serious risk to the relentlessly martial Spartans, who are in turn threatened by the uber-specialized technocratic University--but be careful to underestimate the backwards Lord's Believers, their probe teams will just as quickly rob you of your gains. The Morganites can afford to sparsely defend their home if they're willing to pay off their aggressors, but they'll struggle expand over great swaths of territory without irking civil unrest drone riots from corruption. Meanwhile the Gaian Acolytes can harness the permanently-dangerous mindworms to great effect from the beginning of the game. Yang just... builds. And keeps building, and next thing you know he's conquered the Peacekeepers and turned Miriam into nothing more than a puppet and where are all these cruise missiles are coming from?

In short, the strategic design of this game is nothing less than a work of art, but that isn't to say it doesn't have its anachronisms. The User Interface has taken its inspiration from early versions of Microsoft Word and it rapidly pays off to know the hotkeys. The wonder videos are resolution locked and can sometimes cause problems depending on your display configuration. The unit creation system is simultaneously wonderful and horrendous. It allows me to create special long-range nerve gas bombers that eradicate cities shortly before orbitally-dropping specially-trained garrisons to quash all resistance. On the other hand, if you do not accept the cumbersome slew of computer-generated options, keeping your new weapons systems up to date with your latest technology (especially when playing as Zakharov) rapidly becomes a chore.

That said, there are a variety of features in the game that I think deserve to make a reappearance in the Civ Games. The pick-your-government system is incredibly balanced and fun to roleplay. You can't get away with crimes against humanity when solar storms hit in Civilization VI, nor can you weaponise climate change to flood your rivals cities, or strategically terraform to alter weather patterns and deny your neighbors arable land. At the bare minimum, we should be given the option to nerve staple rebelling cities when our control runs out!

All that said, there is also the story to contend with. One is at first tempted to think that a 4x strategy game with a marked emphasis on replayability would necessarily have a tacked-on story, if one at all. After all, the point is for the player to create it through their actions, not have it spoonfed to them. The majority of what you learn about your world that isn't printed in numbers and small pictures on the mapscreen is through blurbs that accompany each discovered technology or new building. The aforementioned wonders even have their adorable early-CG renderings, sometimes mixed in with some experimental film footage. There are occasional interludes that describe the mindworms and machinations of Planet, but the bulk of the wordage comes from epigrams of the faction leaders and the occasional bit of Nietzsche or Plato. It's so good that I can't help but stop and listen to CEO Nbwadibuke Morgan ramble on about supply chain economics or Sister Miriam's apocalyptic warnings every single time. Take some examples.

Proper care and education for our children remains a cornerstone of our entire colonization effort. Children not only shape our future; they determine in many ways our present. Men and women work harder knowing their children are safe and close at hand, and never forget that, with children present, parents will defend their home to the death!

--Col. Corazon Santiago, "Planet: A Survivalist's Guide"

Or perhaps, a more on the nose one:

"The Academician's private residences shall remain off-limits to the Genetic Inspectors. We possess no retroviral capability, we are not researching retroviral engineering, and we shall not allow this Council to violate faction privileges in the name of this ridiculous witch hunt!

--Fedor Petrov, Vice Provost for University Affairs Accompanies the Retroviral Engineering technology

The game often doesn't directly tell you what Retroviral engineering is, nor does it labor to explain just what having someone nerve stapled means, or the precise function of the Recycling Tanks, but through its quotation it beautifully circumlocutes the world you are shaping--and being shaped by. It really never pulls any of its punches, even if its just on Organic Superlube--great stuff--and I still catch muself quoting it regularly.

Ursula LeGuin once wrote

"Science fiction is often described, and even defined, as extrapolative. The science fiction writer is supposed to take a trend or phenomenon of the here-and-now, purify and intensify it for dramatic effect, and extend it into the future. 'If this goes on, this is what will happen.' [...] This may explain why many people who read science fiction describe it as 'escapist,' but when questioned further, admit they do not read it because 'it's so depressing.'"

Alpha Centauri is absolutely extrapolative fiction and very firmly rooted in the 1990s and I love it. It was released in the Aaron Sorkin TV, pre-9/11 days where the word Internet was more often than not followed by the words, "is like an information superhighway" and it absolutely no efforts are made to cover it up. The main factions are a cross-section of the New Millenium's hopes and anxieties. A New Russia that went a very different path before Putin took over, a cheerful clan of ruthless Western capitalists hellbent on putting Morganvision on every network set, a group of vaguely Scottish free-love peaceniks hellbent on defending the most-of-the-time incredibly hostile environment. There's the Second-Amendment preaching Spartans or the optimistically-influential UN which, judging by its naming scheme for its bases, seems to dedicate entire cities to bureaucratic agencies. The All-American Christian fundamentalists don't entirely butt heads with the frighteningly powerful Human-Hive (if your country calls their cities names like "Huddling of the People" and "Paradise Swarming" you might not be the good guys). The expansion also brings in more dynamic characters like the Information Wants to be Free! data angels Brian Reynolds very clearly came up with after watching Swordfish and Hackers back to back or the Nautilus Pirates who have no right to be as fun as they are.

The visions of the future are at once both anachronistic and prophetic; while elements may come off as cheese, I see it as a sort of window to the past, a way to examine what was once (and sometimes still is) on our mind. All in all, I give Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri 4 out of 5 stars and a definite all-time favorite, warts and all. You can pick it and its expansion up for $6 on Gog.com and play it through a built-in emulator that works for most systems. If you're willing to brave a dated interface and an older-fashioned gameplay style, I would definitely recommend it.

#pc gaming #video games #gaming #civilization #writing #ursula leguin #alpha centauri #sid meier's alpha centauri #sid meier's civilization #the drones need you #they look up to you #game retro #game recs #game review