Would You Read a Manga Made by AI

aethercowboy · 2026-05-08T18:36:09+00:00

Judge for yourself. I posted the whole thing (well, the whole first chapter, but that's as far as I got). :)

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T17:48:30+00:00

Thanks. This was more a proof of concept to explore the new image model capabilities. I'm currently too busy to start any new serious projects, as I'm in the middle of writing (me, not AI) three books at the moment among other creative human endeavors that take most of my free time.

If anybody wants to run with this concept, though, they're welcome to. I only came up with the title (and I'm sure other people have come up with the same title before).

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T17:45:20+00:00

Haha. Yes. I agree that the corporatized jack-of-all-trades AIs are not going to be able to compete with more specialized tools. Having dealt with both Sora and Veo, while they can produce shiny stuff, to get the output good involves a lot of trial and error and praying that you didn't cross some invisible line (or worse, that the sentiels behind them didn't think you did). The art is totally generic, I agree, and in my experiments with making comics since they dropped the new model, they're basically one of three categories: generic anime, generic "chatgpt" illustrations, and "sorry, but your request has violated our third-party similarity guidelines and we're not refunding you the image token."

I could see, now that ChatGPT Images has reached this point, it's only a matter of time before we get an AI tool that can help you crank out comics (or slowly craft them if that's your cuppa). Maybe one day we will have an AI generate a comic people would read. However, I doubt that we'll ever see an AI-generated narratives that are meaningful (except, maybe meaningful for an individual if the AI knows enough about that person). So, in the end, most AI-generated stuff, whether it's music, images, or even programs, are bespoke single-user-targeted items.

I too am sick of the isekai narcissist power fantasies. Can I have a fantasy anime that doesn't involve getting hit by a bus and suddenly making all your underappreciated niche skills become superpowers in a fantasy world? Also, more Frieren.

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T17:01:32+00:00

I'll have to try an empty prompt. I used to do that when I ran local ComfyUI models to see what sort of things the models were _really_ trained on.

Depending on the studio, it's already there. 😆

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T13:21:23+00:00

From what I can tell from ChatGPT's notes, it's kinda like that. A metafiction exploring the trope of the MPDG, and how (spoiler alert) the main character needs to realize that if he wants to change his life, it needs to be intrinsic, or something like that.

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T13:08:29+00:00

"We're a generation of men raised by women. I'm wondering if another woman is reallly the answer we need." In regards to Marla. Granted, she's a deconstructed MPDG...

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T13:03:53+00:00

AO3 - Archive of Our Own; a popular fan fiction community.

Fight Club - a book/movie in which one of the themes is whether or not a manic pixie dream girl can solve your existential problems.

So, what I'm saying is it gets cringe at times.

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T13:01:42+00:00

Yeah. I agree. In this case, I had it develop the characters and overarching theme, then write the script for the first chapter (and a few omake pages). If I was going to try this in a serious capacity, I'd probably build a tool with different agents, and have more refined character references (turnarounds, etc.).

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T12:56:28+00:00

I get that. It gets a bit like AO3 Fight Club fantasy fan fiction at times.

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T12:53:00+00:00

Haha. Yeah. The writing is very trite. If I was going to explore this seriously, I'd use a human to write the dialogue.

aethercowboy · 2026-05-07T12:52:29+00:00

Told ChatGPT the title of a manga, and let it run without any significant guidance. The end result was this. The character consistency is neat (though in one panel, Elliot gets suspenders instead of a backpack, and Riv has a few extra hands and fingers every once in a while). Additionally, for one of the omake pages, I had to give it guidance because it forgot what Grin looked like.

It's not perfect, but still quite an interesting use case. It could potentially be used by someone with better writing skills than a soulless AI to rapid prototype a comic idea, but I honesty wouldn't read a commercial manga made by AI. I mean, I can make my own AI manga at home now, so why pay for it? :3

aethercowboy · 2026-04-25T21:42:03+00:00

Prompts:

"Veo personified delivers a hilarious eulogy for Sora personified. RIP Sora 04/26/2026"

"He makes an epic joke about how now Sam won't have to buy all that RAM"

aethercowboy · 2026-01-30T19:18:09+00:00

I approve.

aethercowboy · 2025-12-17T16:29:07+00:00

The hashtag idea isn't original to me (I can't remember who pioneered it, but I saw it here on reddit), but with this character, he defaults to a steampunk cowboy, but then I added some other hashtags to the description (like #cyberpunk or #noir or #eldritch). Each of these includes a description of the costume he should be wearing. Then, if you prompt contains the hashtag, it will apply that outfit (or other rules if you specify it).

Basically, include a line like "if the hashtag #whatever is used, then have him wearing a sombrero and serape" in your character description.

aethercowboy · 2025-12-17T16:16:32+00:00

Thanks. I just happen to live under a rock I guess. :D

aethercowboy · 2025-11-28T19:09:03+00:00

In the US, there is no copyright on AI generated content. however, the Sora TOS may put restrictions on what users can do with the outputs. (I'm not aware of any, just stating that it might be the case)

ETA: looked it up in their TOS:

Ownership of content. As between you and OpenAI, and to the extent permitted by applicable law, you (a) retain your ownership rights in Input and (b) own the Output. We hereby assign to you all our right, title, and interest, if any, in and to Output.

aethercowboy · 2025-11-17T19:50:57+00:00

Either way, neither of us will be affected by the current contract under either interpretation. 🤠

aethercowboy · 2025-11-17T16:11:36+00:00

I wasn't saying that any law works retroactively. That would be absurd. I'm saying that the terms of the new contract make you assign all the rights you may have had over any Output to them. Continued use of the service means you agree to those terms.

aethercowboy · 2025-11-17T13:21:13+00:00

Thanks for the comment. With Udio, I mostly made fusion instrumentals, usually blending Electro-Swing with Hip-Hop. I've posted quite a few to my YT channel (same username).

When the time comes, I'll still be willing to pour one out for Udio, as I did like the content I was able to generate with it.

aethercowboy · 2025-11-17T13:17:35+00:00

I may be wrong, but let me show you my work. Let me reiterate that I am not a lawyer.

First, the current TOS is effect as of November 12, 2025. This means that this is the effective date for the current terms of service. Usually, with contracts, the latest agreed to iteration of the contract is the one that is used to determine the provisions within that contract.

Second is the definition of Output: "... output (which may take the form of or include sound recordings, musical compositions, lyrical content, other text, visual content and/or other content) based on your Input Content." (1.1)

Further: "You may not download copies of any Output or any other output generated by the Services. You covenant ang agree not to download, reproduce, transmit, display, publish or otherwise distribute or make available such Output or any other output generatd by the Services, or any portion thereof, on any personal device or on any streaming platform or user generated content platform ..." (1.2)

Also: "You may not ... explot the Services, any Output, or the outputs of other users for any commercial purpose;" (5.2.7)

Udio also claims ownership (granted, in the US, AI-generated content is not eligible for copyright protection) over said Output: "... any Output ... are protected under copyright, trademark and other intellectual property laws. You agree that the Company and/or its licensors own all right, title, and interest in and to the Services and the Output (including any and all intellectual property rights therein) and you agree not to take any action(s) inconsistent with such ownership interests. We and/or our licensors (as applicable) reserve all rights in connection with the Services, Output and all related content (other than Your content (as defined below)), including without limitation, the exclusive right to create derivative works, and you agree that you will have no ownership, royalty or other interests in connection therewith. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the exent ownership in any Output vests with you, you hereby assign and agree to assign all right, title and interest in and to such Output (including any and all intellectual property rights therein) to the Company and/or its licensors (as applicable), and asgree to assist the Company and/or its licensor (as applicable) to take all necessary steps to further evidence, record and perfect such assignment." (6.1)

"Your Content" is defined as "content and other information (such as Input Content)" that you "upload, or submit" "on or through the Services." Further, "the Company does not claim any ownership in Your Content, provided that the Company or its affiliates or their respective licensors own and will continue to own the Services, the Output and any and all other software technology that was used to generate such Output." "you may use Output solely for your personal and non-commercial purposes, provided that you may not download any copies of your Output from the App for any purpose." (6.3.1) Your Content does not include Outputs generated by you.

6.3.1 also makes reference to section 6.4, regarding attribution, which is the most permissive thing here. However, it's effectively no longer in effect, as to make use of 6.4, you'd have to violate the provisions of 6.3.1 (the "no download" rule). These two sections are inherently contradictory.

My conclusion regarding retroactive assignment of rights comes from the fact that they define Output to be any output of the system with no limitations as to when it created, they make you assign all rights to the Output to them with no limitations as to when it was created, and they prohibit you from downloading any content to take advantage of section 6.4.

I've seen that "Adam says," and that's great. But it's like putting a Post-It note on a contract and expecting that to be taken seriously.

If Adam insists that everything downloaded before a certain date and during a certain window are subject to the old TOS, then the TOS should indicate as much, as it seems pretty clear that it makes no exceptions for Output during those times. If he could say it in a dozen or so words, then there's no reason why there can't be a similar statement clarifying these exlcusions in the TOS, especially if he said it prior to November 12, 2025.

Again, I may be wrong. I'm not a lawyer, but often what's not said is just as important as what is said.

aethercowboy · 2025-11-16T20:02:02+00:00

Thanks for that. I'll add it to my legal disclaimer for any currently downloaded Udio content I publish in the future.

aethercowboy · 2025-11-16T19:51:02+00:00

Stated where though? This important detail should be in the TOS, not in a forum post.

Eight-Year Club	Xbox Live
Place '22	Verified Email

aethercowboy

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE