discussion AI CG Art isn't ethical

[User_159114]

I dislike AI Art, because it is too derivative. The style is uniform and there is no soul to it.

 

[aljza]

regardless of the ethicallity, it just doesn't feel right, not as if it was missing a "soul" since there are famous artists that do terrible jobs and also AI can replicate everything now
I mean the feeling of knowing that everything now has a chance of not having a human behind it, I read about a university using AI bots to try persuade people on reddit, and realizing that you could just have so much genuine interaction with it and just be fake, makes oneself feel lonely, it's the end stage dead internet theory, except that it could go beyond it

 

[notricksanchez69]

Look, I get this a free-speech forward type of forum. And I get that a cartoon of my little pony doing the nasty with solid snake is probably ethically safer than real porn. So what I'm going to say isn't gonna be super popular.

But AI art is bad.

a) It is produced using images of non-consenting people
b) it is known that ai training sets include images from real life dark content (not fake stuff, actual dark shit floating collected from seedy ass corners of the web by the auto-crawler)
c) it is known that ai will occasionally get lazy and reproduce images from its dataset, basically exactly as they are

Now I get that the people here are masturbation addicts whose brains have been ruined by porn, probably with extra dark fetishes that will never see the light of day. But I like to think that most of us don't want to hurt real people, and more or less are respectable human beings outside of our brains being soaked in hentai for too long.

So respectfully, don't look at ai porn. And if it were up to me, it wouldn't be a thing, especially for known celebrities and darker content.

a) so non-consent, including pirated games, songs, and movies are a no-go for you?
b) is it though? please provide references and I will read, not arguing here, it is just not known to me,
c) agreed, it's not magic, it kinda sucks, and it's kinda the pinnacle of human creation, minus actual babies, which are magic...

 

[Mageborn]

"Photorealistic" AI is creepy to me, but AI art in general isn't bad. I know this post was geared to warn more about the possibilities of AI effecting real people, but I feel like distinctions should be made.

 

[lcflex]

b) is it though? please provide references and I will read, not arguing here, it is just not known to me,

The data set used to train the original Stable Diffusion models (up to 1.5) used a list of URLs that were not filtered for content. The URL list was generated by scraping the internet and published as a "here's a bunch of images" thing, and nobody had verified that the contents were safe. The SD team just picked it up and used it for training. When the issue was discovered, everyone building image generation AIs freaked out and switched to filtered data sets. SD 2 and all later image generation models were not trained on the problematic content.

 

[notricksanchez69]

The data set used to train the original Stable Diffusion models (up to 1.5) used a list of URLs that were not filtered for content. The URL list was generated by scraping the internet and published as a "here's a bunch of images" thing, and nobody had verified that the contents were safe. The SD team just picked it up and used it for training. When the issue was discovered, everyone building image generation AIs freaked out and switched to filtered data sets. SD 2 and all later image generation models were not trained on the problematic content.

Thanks for that. I'm only starting to follow all of this stuff now, so kinda late to the show.

 

[WhiteVanDaycare]

a) so non-consent, including pirated games, songs, and movies are a no-go for you?
b) is it though? please provide references and I will read, not arguing here, it is just not known to me,
c) agreed, it's not magic, it kinda sucks, and it's kinda the pinnacle of human creation, minus actual babies, which are magic...

The data set used to train the original Stable Diffusion models (up to 1.5) used a list of URLs that were not filtered for content. The URL list was generated by scraping the internet and published as a "here's a bunch of images" thing, and nobody had verified that the contents were safe. The SD team just picked it up and used it for training. When the issue was discovered, everyone building image generation AIs freaked out and switched to filtered data sets. SD 2 and all later image generation models were not trained on the problematic content.

The "questionable" content was no worse than items you find on an average year of browsing the internet, it was really blown out of proportion by media and politicians to garner attention. They claimed that if it can generate images of things like rape it MUST contain them in it's data set (which is untrue). The whole point of advanced AI is it can extrapolate from the data set, earlier versions would simply mimic and slightly modify by joining elements of images (but we have come a long way baby).

I don't like the IRL looking AI, but have been surprised by My New Girlfriend and Shadows of Ambition (I think same creator). Notice I say creator and not artist - that's intentional as I don't believe they are artists (if anyone is an artist in this it is the AI itself).

 

[tipipe]

The day of ai will stop using artist work in training i will be okay with that. For now, i can't

 

[WhiteVanDaycare]

The day of ai will stop using artist work in training i will be okay with that. For now, i can't

Think of the datasets as the knowledge acquired by observing, not just AI learns this way as humans do as well. Humans literally go to school, read books, even watch movies to learn from others and expand our own dataset. Unless somehow everyone agrees to stop (didn't work for nukes either) it will be as Thano's said:

You must be registered to see attachments

 

[fthegovernment]

Look, I get this a free-speech forward type of forum. And I get that a cartoon of my little pony doing the nasty with solid snake is probably ethically safer than real porn. So what I'm going to say isn't gonna be super popular.

But AI art is bad.

a) It is produced using images of non-consenting people
b) it is known that ai training sets include images from real life dark content (not fake stuff, actual dark shit floating collected from seedy ass corners of the web by the auto-crawler)
c) it is known that ai will occasionally get lazy and reproduce images from its dataset, basically exactly as they are

Now I get that the people here are masturbation addicts whose brains have been ruined by porn, probably with extra dark fetishes that will never see the light of day. But I like to think that most of us don't want to hurt real people, and more or less are respectable human beings outside of our brains being soaked in hentai for too long.

So respectfully, don't look at ai porn. And if it were up to me, it wouldn't be a thing, especially for known celebrities and darker content.

i don't agree with your opening statement & the rest of it is just nothing more than personal opinion that leads nowhere than to argument..

 

[lcflex]

The "questionable" content was no worse than items you find on an average year of browsing the internet, it was really blown out of proportion by media and politicians to garner attention. They claimed that if it can generate images of things like rape it MUST contain them in it's data set (which is untrue). The whole point of advanced AI is it can extrapolate from the data set, earlier versions would simply mimic and slightly modify by joining elements of images (but we have come a long way baby).

I don't like the IRL looking AI, but have been surprised by My New Girlfriend and Shadows of Ambition (I think same creator). Notice I say creator and not artist - that's intentional as I don't believe they are artists (if anyone is an artist in this it is the AI itself).

It's more than that

You must be registered to see links

 

[LUVGAMZ23]

For AI porn, the reality is = it's here.
So are shooter games.
So are older Star Wars games where I get to press (and enjoy) blowing up a planet, or watch a movie where Darth Vader kills younglings.
I am not embarrassed to say I love playing evil in video games. It's fiction, and I can legally play a monster like Darth Vader for the first 5-10 minutes of Force Unleashed.

Said a different way:
The first car was driven on July 3 1886, just shy of 139 years ago. What are cars like now? Now imagine what AI will be in 139 years.
People said when cars were invented "You shouldn't use them. Use horses." Yet, how many of you ride horses to work right now, today?
You wanna rail against AI, I'm not going to stop you. But it is going to be used, for work, home comforts, and yes, porn.

If you want to rail against that and try to ban it, feel free. Good luck.

 

[WhiteVanDaycare]

It's more than that

You must be registered to see links

Instead of the abstract, I would suggest reading

You must be registered to see links

(I know, summaries are just easier). What do they define as CSAM? Does it include links to things like screenshots of games like 'Proud Parent' despite containing no real people? Who was the 'third party' that identified these as objectionable links and what was their criteria? This 'study' is missing sooo many details it is most likely garbage (but grabs a lot of headlines). Even if completely accurate (which obviously I doubt), they say hundreds out of over 3.5 billion entries were possibly CSAM.

 

[tipipe]

Think of the datasets as the knowledge acquired by observing, not just AI learns this way as humans do as well. Humans literally go to school, read books, even watch movies to learn from others and expand our own dataset. Unless somehow everyone agrees to stop (didn't work for nukes either) it will be as Thano's said:

You must be registered to see attachments

Yes but for humans, laws exist for plagiarism, and humans have a real capacity of imagination. ia lacks of regulation and punishment for non-ethical people who work with ia

 

[lcflex]

Yes but for humans, laws exist for plagiarism, and humans have a real capacity of imagination. ia lacks of regulation and punishment for non-ethical people who work with ia

Violating copyright with AI is just as illegal as it is via any other means. Copyright law makes no distinction for the method of copying.

 

[PapaQ]

I actively avoid all games and images featuring AI CG.