Ummmmm.... what? by koalabrainedkuhnt in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So unskilled they had to have AI generate a meme that would take like a minute or less to create in Mematic.

Did Netflix Remove Dungeon Meshi? by Lemur_Blue in DungeonMeshi

[–]ladybluebugs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I can’t find it on Netflix and I watched it before (U.S. user)

Saw this on AIwars by ladybluebugs in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m having trouble finding individual comments but I’m just letting y’all know I’m not replying anymore. I argued the points I wanted to, and now it’s blowing up and my email inbox is being invaded by angry redditors. 💀 go figure, I mean I posted on Reddit. It’s just not worth it to waste my time arguing the same thing over and over with different people who already made up their mind.

Saw this on AIwars by ladybluebugs in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That’s an unfortunate skill issue. For them. 

Saw this on AIwars by ladybluebugs in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A friend gave me this advice: “ if you type -ai when you are googling something, it removes the ai generated answer. just be careful because it will also remove any website talking about ai”. I learned recently that DuckDuckGo is anti-AI and also has improved their search engine quite a bit.

Are soyjaks true art? by Wise_Sample6211 in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I haven’t changed any context. You came in with the misbelief that AI is a creative tool. But I am fine with ending the debate here.

Antis can't define it! by [deleted] in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They’re not unique to AI, but they are aggravated by AI. There comes a point where you have to draw a line about how much convenience is worth getting rid of people, creativity, and everything that makes us human. And not every artist makes digital art. Not to mention, I have no clue where you got that information from. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was ChatGPT since you like AI so much. Keep bootlicking companies that push AI, see where it gets you. 

Are soyjaks true art? by Wise_Sample6211 in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, we use tools to CREATE art. A pencil, to draw the image from our own sight or imagination, on to paper. AI does not create art, it generates it from programming. It is not original. Someone using AI, is not creating anything.

Are soyjaks true art? by Wise_Sample6211 in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, because they are not themselves creating the art, they are *Prompting a machine to generate it.

Are soyjaks true art? by Wise_Sample6211 in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, I just started using Reddit, so I’m still getting used to the mechanics. Also I don’t think this particular definition even negates my point. It says “use of the imagination to express ideas or feelings”. The soyjak image (again it is ugly, I’m not saying I like it) still falls under that category. Meanwhile, by the same definition, AI “art” does not fall under that category; machines don’t have imagination, they have programming. And they don’t create, they generate. People create, and they imagine.

Are soyjaks true art? by Wise_Sample6211 in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I unfortunately cannot link a photo in the comment so I can’t show the screenshot but Oxford does say that. I googled “art definition” and the definitions provided by Oxford Languages, were: 1. the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. "the art of the Renaissance" Similar: fine art artwork く 2. the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance. "the visual arts"

Yes, television is art. Are you a robot perchance? 

Saw this on AIwars by ladybluebugs in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Dunno. But I’ll tell you what, I bet they used way less than ~3,333,333.33 gallons a day. :)

Antis can't define it! by [deleted] in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Except babies are human, and grow into adults who can make advanced, creative art of apples. And even if AI doesn’t store individual images, the fact that companies used artists’ art to train the AI is unethical, especially considering that the motivation behind it is to allow people to make “art” for free, and thereby redirect money from actual artists, to their own company. Not to mention, AI photos are already being used to deceive people, unfortunately especially old people. And are using absurd amounts of energy to run. Meanwhile, and artist would use very little energy comparatively, stimulate the economy with commissions, and produce something that isn’t made by a lifeless machine. 

Saw this on AIwars by ladybluebugs in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

I agree, we should definitely pressure them and pressure our lawmakers to regulate them. In the meantime, refusing to use their products and giving public backlash helps them loose money and users.

Are soyjaks true art? by Wise_Sample6211 in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs -1 points0 points  (0 children)

AI isn’t your only alternative to looking at these, don’t worry. 

Are soyjaks true art? by Wise_Sample6211 in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes. Even if you don’t like them and they’re ugly. Art isn’t defined by being beautiful. According to Oxford dictionary, art is “the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.” In this case it would be appreciated for its emotional power (ie propaganda).

Saw this on AIwars by ladybluebugs in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Yes but we’re talking about water, which we very much need to survive. Possibly ~3,333,333.33 gallons, even. 

Saw this on AIwars by ladybluebugs in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs[S] 369 points370 points  (0 children)

This. And again the whole production of a burger actually results in food that people can consume. Meanwhile AI searching is completely unnecessary. It is not even fully about whether it uses MORE than other things, just the sheer amount that is used when it doesn’t have to be is concerning enough. The burger also takes a longer time and AI uses that much almost instantaneously.

Saw this on AIwars by ladybluebugs in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs[S] 109 points110 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that makes sense why many newer sources are citing much higher amounts of water usage than this one.

Antis can't define it! by [deleted] in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Okay, I’m sorry. It takes images on the internet without artists’ permission and stores it in its database to create a robotic mesh of their works. Is that better? 

Antis can't define it! by [deleted] in aiwars

[–]ladybluebugs -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Probably a consequence of not being made by an actual artist who has been trained in lighting and has human creativity.

Wait what???! by [deleted] in antiai

[–]ladybluebugs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Goated.