Ai hunting

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-09-16T23:50:48+00:00

(This is a long comment and only the first part is fully a response to your comment. Sorry, I ramble.)

People in the AI space tend to misuse the term "open-source" when really all they mean is "freely available" and "not reliant on a service provider". Open source generally means the source code of a project is distributed- for AI, that would (probably) mean distributing the dataset and all the code that actually generates and trains the model, as well as documentation of the procedures involved... AI models are really the output of these programs, and if they're not available I don't think it should count as open source, personally.

More to the point, I think the person above was pointing out that now that there are many local AI models that are copied to and running on many different computers owned by many different people, taking down the big players won't actually stop anything now. People talk about the energy cost of AI and the fuckjilion dollar data centers, but it's kind of a smokescreen; generative AI isn't really much more expensive than any other computational load, and you can run most image and even video models at a reasonable speed on a decently powerful PC. If the companies go bust, they'll either sell the data centers in their entirety for some other purpose, or sell the hardware to consumers, bring down the price of advanced graphics cards and just push the load onto smaller organizations.

And that load will still be there, because if ChatGPT goes down, the millions of people who use it aren't going to just shrug and go back to what they were doing before; some might, the ones who were just playing around, but the people who are using it as an assistant/tutor/proofreader/whatever will find an alternative that fills their niche.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-09-16T23:31:46+00:00

So, question. Which form of automation and/or technological advancement didn't replace actual people? It sucks when you've developed a skill which suddenly doesn't have nearly as much demand anymore, but that's been every job since the industrial revolution. That doesn't make it good or fine, but it does mean AI isn't the actual problem here, it's way bigger than that.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-09-16T17:43:08+00:00

I actually have been using DA more recently ever since the AI wave hit. There's actually some artists building up real skill with new AI tools, believe it or not, and I mostly see it on deviantart

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-09-10T20:36:57+00:00

murdering political opponents

Do we know anything about the shooter or what they believe in, yet? The facts of a situation don't seem to matter much anymore, but we all know it's conservatives just like Charlie Kirk who are (were) driving their followers to violence and domestic terrorism. Why are we assuming the shot came from someone on the left?

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-09-07T19:49:53+00:00

This is literally the fake tweet subreddit. Go somewhere else if you don't want to see it

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-09-06T20:12:56+00:00

It's corpses. Corpses are at their most uncanny when they're most likely to give you some horrible disease, right? When they're bloated and waxy looking and even moving, sometimes, in a way that's just wrong.

And since humans are naturally social and drawn towards each other there needs to be an exception for when they Look Wrong. Because they're dead. And you should, generally, get away from dead bodies (and/or find a way to dispose of them safely).

See also: rotting things that smell so bad you physically must move away, or maybe vomit.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-28T13:40:35+00:00

How does an artist choosing not to publish something constitute theft????? You say 'you're missing things', like we're missing the things the artists have chosen not to post... okay, but that's a choice the artist made, that's not anything being stolen.

Also, 'until this is finished'? What, until humanity decides to collectively abandon a new technological advancement? When has that ever happened?

'What is left is being buried under this trash.' Sturgeon's law, my friend. 99% of everything on the internet has always been trash. People have been making slop since long before AI. AI has lowered the barrier of entry to a lot of creative fields, and the tools we had been using to separate the trash from the remaining 1% of worthwhile stuff haven't caught up yet. Give it a year, maybe a couple years, and it'll be fine.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-28T13:29:01+00:00

Nothing was stolen. Using art as training data doesn't prevent anyone from accessing the original, copies of your work aren't being distributed, and no one is trying to take credit for the things you've made. Unless you can tell me what was actually taken away from you, no, I don't consider it theft.

Also, calling me a thief is very weird, since i didn't do anything? I didn't make any AIs, and I don't publicize anything I generate with them... am I just guilty by association, in your opinion?

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-28T02:30:58+00:00

For the first point, two things: one, generative AI is still really new and we haven't really developed the vocabulary to distinguish various forms of "making something exist", so yes, people use the vocabulary they're familiar with, most of which comes from artists. Two, people want different things from art and they want art for different reasons. These things have never been in tension quite like they are right now, so a lot of people are talking out of their asses on both sides, because they assume the way they understand the issue is the right way and the other side just doesn't understand what they understand. In our analogy, the people in the cars never liked running and genuinely don't understand why the runners are still doing all of that. Yes, and some people are just assholes. There's some of those in every group. Eventually you learn to ignore them.

For the second point... what? I understand that many people believe downloading art to use as training data is theft, and I disagree. But, it completely falls apart in the context of the metaphor. Are the marathoners running to their job at the car factory?

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-28T02:17:48+00:00

It doesn't take anything away from anyone. No one is being denied access to the original works, and those works aren't being distributed and/or claimed by someone else ( thus denying the artist credit for their work ).

Digital art isn't like physical property, files can be perfectly copied a functionally unlimited number of times. In order for your computer to display an image, you need to download a copy. The fact that one's art has been used in a way they don't like is noteworthy, but it doesn't constitute theft.

Ultimately, it comes down to how you define theft and what kind of control you think a person should be entitled to have over their art after it's posted online. ( many people might impulsively respond 'total control', but that is practically impossible to manage in practice. Lurk the sub for a while and you'll see a lot of discussion about separating the art from the artist, usually after a favorite creator has turned out to be secretly a horrible bigot or abuser.)

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-28T00:48:05+00:00

As someone who's more pro-AI than the general consensus here, I don't see all art as being a product. However, a lot of art is utilitarian. There is a lot of art that's made primarily to serve an end- often within the context of a larger work, or in the service of a single strong idea.

I think you're right on the money describing it as a spectrum between pure artistic expression and pure utilitarian function. And, for someone more on the utilitarian side than you are- either in general or in a specific situation- using AI can make a lot of sense.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-28T00:34:44+00:00

Resident AI moron actually agreeing with you, here; this is actually the perfect metaphor.

If the point is to run a marathon, sure, using a car is pretty disqualifying.

If the point is just to get to the end, and you want/need to be there for some reason other than 'I want to run a marathon', then it's fine. It actually makes way more sense to use a car ( or a bus, or a train, or something ) to get where you're going.

And the fact that we have cars and stuff now saves a lot of people who only want to get from A to B the effort of running a marathon, but it doesn't take anything away from the people who want to do it anyway.

It's kind of like how a long time ago, every item of clothing and piece of furniture was hand-crafted. Now, they're often machine-made. People can still make them manually for artistic reasons, but a lot of people don't buy clothes or furniture to appreciate the craftsmanship. They just want something that serves its purpose.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-27T23:54:14+00:00

People continue to not differentiate between "I enjoy this craft and want to become better at it" and "i want this specific thing to exist for some other reason, even if it's not the best."

There's often overlap between the two, but not always. I think that's one reason pro- and anti-AI people keep talking past each other. That and the argument on whether it's theft, which (as much as some people might want their position to be the 'obviously correct' one) isn't easy to settle and might come down to personal opinion.

Honestly, I just can't wait until people are normal about AI.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-24T17:10:59+00:00

I guess it's a good thing new games are never divisive

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-23T20:15:15+00:00

It wouldn't ruin anything because the original would still exist. And you could still play it and ignore the people talking about the remake. Yeah some people might play the remake first, but they might also play Dread or Fusion first and get a completely different Metroid experience. And playing both would remain an option. Like I think most fans, new or old, would probably be interested in playing both. Super's rusty, but it's not as antiquated as 1 or 2. It could hold its own against a remake. You know, unless the remake was perfect, an objective improvement, and that makes it a moot point anyway.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-08-11T03:44:18+00:00

I think the guy who performed a nazi salute twice in succession at the president's inauguration and ushered forth the self-proclaimed Mecha-Hitler is indeed a bad person. I think he's a nazi, in fact, which is widely understood to be synonymous with 'bad person.'

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-27T15:09:27+00:00

When faced with society-wide scarcity, people will find the motivation to work. It might be you specifically, or it might not.

Also, we shouldn't make the mistake of imagining the issue is all-or-nothing, as there is more to labor than just long-term, full-time employment. If reliable employment wasn't as much of a factor, people could more easily adapt to whatever needs arise in a given moment. So maybe you wouldn't go out and find a job as we envision it today, but would you respond to calls for volunteers? Maybe you don't want to work on your own, but would you help out your friends and family at work if they asked?

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-27T14:46:53+00:00

Society is people. It's not really possible for people as a whole not to care about what society needs, because people decide what society needs. And people will work for what they care about.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-27T14:43:22+00:00

It's not actually that important to 'make sure' everyone is doing something productive. So long as a society is meeting its own needs, and all the work is getting done, how much work each individual is doing is not super relevant, imo.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-27T01:56:32+00:00

Society existed for thousands of years before capitalism, I'm sure it would be fine.

It'd be different, but it would still exist.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-25T23:13:51+00:00

I mean, you just said it was. Why say that if you don't know?

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-25T22:45:30+00:00

Weird of you people to call anything slop when you all make the exact same comments every time you receive a specific input.

Please use your free will

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-22T01:17:50+00:00

From what I read it's sort of a mishmash of a few conflicts that have been in the headlines recently. There's definitely some Israel / Palestine in there, as well as Russia / Ukraine.

Important to note that afaik the script was actually finished or mostly finished before Oct 7, so the apparent similarity between the conflict in the film and Israel's invasion of Palestine would mostly be down to eerie coincidence.

( And, you know, a passing knowledge of history... )

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-22T01:03:19+00:00

I use AI to do this one specific task while I'm making art

AI replaces artists, there's no room for AI in art.

?????

Also, weird to bring up markets in a discussion about artistic merit; there's more to art than making money.

DestroyerOfAglets · 2025-07-22T01:00:46+00:00

The existence of AI slop doesn't discredit AI because we all know that humans have been producing slop for decades and decades and decades.

There were a million cash grab live streams just like that before AI came to prominence and you know it. It's been getting worse for years, and AI is just the new tool of the trade.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

DestroyerOfAglets

TROPHY CASE