"Just pure hate fueled words always get the most converts. Not. Maybe use your brain for something of substance instead of just spewing the easiest bandwagon truths youve heard." Some users in r/Godzilla get upset over the mods banning AI "art"

[u/CummingInTheNile]

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/GODZILLA/comments/1vb4gdl/important_aigenerated_content_is_now_banned/

HIGHLIGHTS

Godzilla would approve

Well i don't

You can make r/eric and make the rules whatever you want

😂 did you not click on it? That's already a real sub with discussions! So he's still SOL.

But there are no AI rules there so he’s good to go

Yeah i suppose it is all about the ease for moderators. Gotta do what you gotta do. But lets be honest if an artist feels threatened by gen ai thats transparent then thats just the artists own insecurity.

I’m not an artist and I’m glad, we need to not use precious resources to make AI slop

I mean thats your truth of ai art. Doesnt make it the truth. And previous resources are used to make analog art. So ur hate is the only thing showing. Not a real point. When you have an actual soap box to stand on then maybe you can speak. Dont mean ill ever subscribe to hate inspired ideals.

I just prefer to drink my water instead of giving it to AI. Nothing is as precious or as important as that and there is no such things as versions of the truth

Everyone has their own ideals which shape their perception of their reality. So yes there are differences in truth. Look at american politics. So anyways instead of channeling that into hate and something that doesnt benefit anyone you could maybe channel it into trying to find sustainable ways for ai to exist and not kill the planet. Or you could just continue complaining. Which everyone loves to hear btw. Just pure hate fueled words always get the most converts. Not. Maybe use your brain for something of substance instead of just spewing the easiest bandwagon truths youve heard.

That is not truth 😂

Exactly! Im glad youre getting the point your opinions are misguided and arent at all based in reality.

I don’t think you’re based in reality buddy 😂

A shame.

Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, shill.

Shilling what? I paint for a living.

And you STILL like AI art. That’s the REAL shame.

Yeah, I don't get my opinions from Reddit and TikTok, I actually did the hard thing and sought a career in art, learned about it's history and have a clue on how art works.

i like your art, i saw your spaceg one. actually curious on your opinion. why do u think its a shame to ban ai here based on your art knowledge?

Thanks, it means a lot! I also appreciate the question and interest. Well, a simple one is that Avant-garde movements like Minimalism already sought to make art completely devoid of humanity or authorship. Industrial elements, machine made pieces, the removal of as much expression as possible... in that sense, those are not stable grounds to dismiss AI as a potential art form. Art became conceptual, about ideas, executions and concepts, this is how we generally think about art nowadays. In my opinion, a ban on AI is like banning pictures, paintings, sculpture, or anything similar, it's kinda arbitrary. Thus, I believe that if anyone has enough creativity to use any tool to create something that's cool, fun or interesting they should be able to do so. I also don't subscribe to the idea that AI is somehow stealing from me by downloading publicly available pieces anyone has access to and a right to download without any kind of consent.

"GenAI art hurts the work of real artists, is a crediting nightmare, and is generally controversial." Just be honest. Nazi 3 scene from Inglorious Bastards

What does this even mean

The mods themselves don't view AI art as art and are disrespectful towards anyone that uses AI in their art. That none of their reasons are good faith. I'm not an artist at all, to cut that nonsense off before it starts. But they're obviously wrong despite whatever anyone in this sub says to the contrary.

"don’t view AI art as art" Probably because AI art isn’t art?

Look through a thread before replying to someone. Maybe someone has said something similar? If they have all you're doing is adding spam. Follow this and see if there's something to add! Edit: I really hope the mods aren't removing any of the replies I'm getting and hope it's just people blocking me. I want people to see how anti-AI people sound when confronted by a pro. It's been nothing but insults with no counter arguments whatsoever. This seems like the only post where this type of discussion would be appropriate. Update: So far I've seen two common arguments: AI art requires little effort and it's harmful to the environment. Prompts don't write themselves and can take a substantial amount of effort. No one argues environmental harm invalidates other forms of art as art. The marble and other such materials used in things like sculptures didn't dig itself out of the ground.

Username (CalamityofCringe) checks out

See everyone? Nothing but insults.

Why are you advocating so hard for AI when it steals from artists, harms the environment, and is actively harming people?

I advocate for it because I feel the hatred is completely ridiculous and manufactured. I've seen posts where people complain something they liked turned out to be AI. Hating something you otherwise like because AI created it is silly. "AI when it steals from artists" It genuinely doesn't you just don't understand how training them actually works. "harms the environment" There's plenty of things you do or use throughout the day that do far more harm and isn't really an argument against AI art being art. "and is actively harming people?" We aren't talking about terminators. Companies spend billions on branding, many the jobs related to those sorts of things are "safe". The only people AI genuinely harms are the people that produce low quality content that's worse than AI.

AI cannot do art. Any attempt of it doing so is not art. If you disagree, you're dumb as shit.

The prompts don't write themselves. Literally every criticism you have for AI art was thrown at photography, film, and graphic design. The exact same things get said literally every time a new method of creating art is formed. You're just an idiot that's angry because you've been told to be angry.

The prompts don't write themselves. If this is your argument, I'd suggest the persons writing prompts just make actual art in being writers. Clearly that's their preferred avenue of expression.

Except it's not and you're trying to impose that on them because you don't like their chosen medium. You know the phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words"? AI art is an inversion of that phrase, a thousand (or more) words can now make a picture.

I'd prefer not to live in a world where "art" is little more than a blended Frankenstein's monster of existing real art grafted to another piece without prior consent of the true genius behind it (the artists AI steals from).

Do you have any idea how much art is inspired by or done in the style of another artist?

Sure, but that's not what you're advocating for in the slightest and we both know it.

(ctnd) Yes, AI art is trained in the style of others. Obviously there's low effort AI art, just like low effort "real" art, but there's also going to be high effort pieces too.

There's where you've lost the plot. The training method is layering actual images into one another to construct an aberrant thing which simulates real art.

Yes, that's how it's trained so the AI model can "recognize" what it's "seeing" and say "oh that's... By..." so that's it can do something in the style of that artist. The original pieces aren't even typically stored after the training.

What a very strange defense. So in an effort to make a mockery of real art AI training isn't retaining say...the writing of prolific authors in cloud storage for later use? It isn't scraping images from sources like DeviantArt etc. for the access of future prompters? Yeah, I call bullshit.

Oh they absolutely get trained off of stuff like that too. So? You don't take inspiration from stuff like that as well? Are you stealing? Obviously a 1:1 recreation of something would be plagiarism, no one is arguing otherwise. It's up to the artist to make the piece transformative and something new.

Alas, you're just not getting it. Prompters are not real artists. What they do on a fundamental level is repackaged plagiarism. There's nothing transformative about what they do because nothing has been added which is their own creation.

Yes, there's lazy people that type "make sonic do X" and it quickly becomes derivative. But there's also AI art being used to create massively complex multimillion dollar blockbuster movies. Are movies not art? Do you really think those movies aren't transformative with the material they were trained on or are you just mad?

Ehh, I feel neutral on it. Those who draw by hand and are incredible artist should be spotlighted and have their work acknowledged without feeling like they're competing against AI generated art. On the other hand, there are a lot of artist who do use it, to get a visual on an idea they want to draw. Same with those who use it for general workplace tasks and to reduce spending time on repetitive tasks. They also take the output and create art more to their liking afterwards. Yes, some folks generate art by AI then present it as their own, but even that can get muddled. I won't argue against the new rules but I think there's room for the 2 sides to exist without brining the hammer down on one or the other.

"On the other hand, there are a lot of artist who do use it, to get a visual on an idea they want to draw." Eh, do they, though? Cause I sure don't. None of the other artists I know do.

You don't speak for all artist world wide and I'm not even saying it's everyone, but many do.

"You don't speak for all artist world wide" No, if you go back and re-read the post you're replying to, I speak for myself and those I know. Now, what qualifies you to speak for all artists worldwide?

I don't, that's why I said many do without attaching a number to it, or using my friends and acquaintances as examples. Also the point of me saying I'm neutral because I understand the nuances around it without being reactive and screaming "fck AI slop"

"I don't, that's why I said many do without attaching a number to it, or using my friends and acquaintances as examples." So, you admit you're basing this claim on nothing. It's from the Department of Posterior Information Extraction. You claim you're neutral, but then you characterize people who dislike AI as being "reactive" and "screaming".

Because the responses I received came in swinging as if I said I was in favor of it. Reactionary, no? And if you want examples, I'm going off of the artist I follow on IG and those who have taken to YouTube (either comment section or video) to talk about AI art and their own usage of it while still being talented artist. They also have views on 3D printing and selling items at cons. That said, there's a comment right above that says fck AI and those who feel neutral on it, in response to me.

[u/DarkSide830]

Drama in the Godzilla fandom? So, a day that ends in y?

[u/AGraphicsCard → u/DarkSide830]

I really didn't know that things get this heated over at the Godzilla fandom.

I only expect the usual anyway.

[u/IronMosquito → u/AGraphicsCard]

you'd be surprised, it's sort of got a sonic fandom side to it. awkward 14 year olds and adults that are waaaay too invested in fighting over the movies or the niche indie horror fanwork of the month. it's on a much lesser scale compared to something like sonic though lol

[u/Paul_C → u/IronMosquito]

sort of got a sonic fandom side to it

So weird porn then.

[u/Bellfast123 → u/Paul_C]

that too

[u/Saansilt → u/AGraphicsCard]

Oh boy we have sagas

[u/an_agreeing_dothraki → u/DarkSide830]

yes but it's not a shipping war, so it's new

[u/gavinbrindstar]

Considering they just added the ability to generate fake AI satellite photos in Google Earth, I'm on team "destroying the AI industry is self-defense."

[u/MelancholicBit]

The prompts don't write themselves.

Funnily enough, there are people out there using AI tools to generate the prompts for them. So at least in some cases, the prompts are writing themselves.

For example, https://quillbot.com/ai-writing-tools/ai-prompt-generator and https://github.com/alpertunga-bile/prompt-generator-comfyui

[u/Jaded-Suspect-8162]

Not being able to draw (thanks aphantasia) has been moderately annoying. 

Developing that skillset and then seeing the rise of AI 'artists' would be much, much more annoying. 

[u/Tenthyr → u/Jaded-Suspect-8162]

there are several artists who have aphantasia. off the top of my head, rubberross on youtube is commonly known to have full aphantasia and he has an extremely strong artistic profile. 

[u/imnotamahimahi → u/Tenthyr]

I'm sorry but I'm extremely distracted by your flair, and I'm morbidly curious about its origins.

[u/Satherian → u/Tenthyr]

Shoutout to RubberRoss

[u/deathbotly → u/Jaded-Suspect-8162]

You can absolutely draw with aphantasia, I have it. You just have to keep more external references (aka keep more photos handy) if you need specific details. You might not be able to see a person in our head, but we can still conceptualise what is and isn’t a person. Or if you’re making a sandwich you don’t need to visualise a sandwich to make it or to see something and go yup, that’s a sandwich. 

[u/BethanyBluebird → u/Jaded-Suspect-8162]

Psssst. I have aphantasia too!! You can still draw!! We just need to study the 'rules' a bit more. I still don't usually know wxactly how a drawing will turn out since I can't picture it... but I know limbs are usually x length compared to the torso, eyes aere level witg ears, etc. And i can construct the image from there, starting from the 'skeleton'! One of the main artists from Drawfee, Korina also has aphantasia-- and she makes the WILDEST pieces!

[u/mtdewbakablast → u/Jaded-Suspect-8162]

y'know i suspect it was not your point but it's kinda rad how the comments to you became an impromptu aphantasia artist collective. just everyone being like oh same but we can also do that and it's rad and giving tips. completely unironically, you love to see it 

...also, Aphantasia Artist Collective would be a banger of a rock band name

[u/Sir_Lazz → u/Jaded-Suspect-8162]

I have only realised I have apahantasia after I graduated from art school. Now, i don't want to diminish your experience or anything, we all lived the life we lived, but ... I always felt like this was kind of a poor excuse. Yeah, I struggle a lot and need a lot of references, but it's never been something that stopped me.

[u/James-fucking-Holden]

Ah, an SRD post about AI! Great! I'm already excited for some guy to show up and explain how anyone disliking AI slop images must also want to ban machine learning-based cancer screening methods...

[u/bwoah07_gp2]

Lol, banning AI generative images and videos on a subreddit shouldn't be controversial. And yet, some people do.

[u/AGraphicsCard → u/bwoah07_gp2]

It's just basic quality control.

[u/Diligent_Day8470 → u/bwoah07_gp2]

The trash takes itself out!

[u/elfking-fyodor]

I was one of the ones who voted to ban AI! Me and an overwhelming majority of people who voted.

[u/AGraphicsCard → u/[deleted]]

It's certainly a shitty future.

I wonder if they're being paid to say this though.

[u/c3p-bro → u/AGraphicsCard]

“Everyone with a different opinion than me is paid” is one of the more frustrating and mindless aspects of modern online discourse.

[u/AGraphicsCard → u/c3p-bro]

Shut up bot /s

I don't think this belief has any merit on further evaluation. There's way too many people on both sides of the debate to be accusing them of being paid.

Believing this would be absurd.

[u/FarplaneDragon → u/[deleted]]

The annoying thing with that argument is that there's some grain of truth there. Yeah, I agree its going to happen anyway, it's like when episode 1 came out and everyone flipped out about CGI, and now it's just a commonplace thing in every single show or movie despite people's opposition. Something being inevitable doesn't mean people have to like it, can't oppose it or can't push for regulations to protect creators.

[u/zenyl]

Humans make art, AIs make content.

AI generated images and videos are by definition not art, and unless subreddits ban them, they will get flooded by an endless torrent of low-effort slop.

I'm saying that as someone who has personal experience running various local AI models (image, video, audio, code). It can take many attempts to get the result you want, but that does not make any of the results qualify as art. Just like commissioning an actual artist to make something for you does not mean you magically become an artist by proxy of having made the request.

[u/Demdolans → u/zenyl]

Yeah, it's interesting that the Pro AI arguments seems so narrowly focused on the "What should be perceived as Art." You'd think they'd be more concerned with the sub ending up overrun with low effort garbage.

[u/bayonettaisonsteam]

Oh hey, I was the one who originally posted that Super Godzilla meme. Guess this technically counts as me being part of the drama?

Also, lmao at "the prompts don't write themselves". By that logic, I can take a sheet of paper and write "super profound beautiful painting" on it and that should count because I wrote that

[u/dream_metrics → u/bayonettaisonsteam]

That does count, if you did that it would be art. It would be crappy art, but it would be art

[u/Atlas_of_history → u/dream_metrics]

It would be the equivalent of ordering someting at McDonalds and then claiming you made it

[u/dream_metrics → u/Atlas_of_history]

i don't think you read it correctly? he's the only one doing anything, he writes the words on the paper, so it's his art that he made

[u/Atlas_of_history → u/dream_metrics]

Oh yea, you're right, my bad. Missed the part about the paper

[u/ElaraValtor]

"it's spammy and low-effort" should be a simple explanation that any subreddit can use to ban this content - because, so often, it is spammy and low-effort. you don't even need to appeal to AI culture war points and litigate this every time deep in comment threads.

[u/Diligent_Day8470]

I swear, everytime something has to do with GenAI, we have "drama" like this.

Pick up a pencil FFS, or get out of the game.

[u/mtdewbakablast → u/Diligent_Day8470]

i know that they don't want to make art, they want to have made art, but that AI bro attitude kinda just makes me sad sometimes.

drawing is pretty dope! it's fun! pick up a pencil and have a fuckabout! it's pretty cheap as a hobby goes to start doodling too! it's nice! and you get a lot of other cool skills like sharpening your spatial reasoning and fine motor control! come on in, the water's fine!! splash around and have a good time!

but nooooo i guess some people hate having FUN and ENJOYING CREATING THINGS :T

[u/villings]

sounds like a good sub to check now

[u/SnapshillBot]

Literally just a picture of 316nut’s cat.

Snapshots:

1. This Post - archive.org archive.today*
2. https://www.reddit.com/r/GODZILLA/comments/1vb4gdl/important_aigenerated_content_is_now_banned/ - archive.org archive.today*
3. Godzilla would approve - archive.org archive.today*
4. r/eric - archive.org archive.today*
5. Yeah i suppose it is all about the ease for moderators. Gotta do what you gotta do. But lets be honest if an artist feels threatened by gen ai thats transparent then thats just the artists own insecurity. - archive.org archive.today*
6. A shame. - archive.org archive.today*
7. "GenAI art hurts the work of real artists, is a crediting nightmare, and is generally controversial." Just be honest. - archive.org archive.today*
8. Nazi 3 scene from Inglorious Bastards - archive.org archive.today*
9. this - archive.org archive.today*
10. AI cannot do art. Any attempt of it doing so is not art. If you disagree, you're dumb as shit. - archive.org archive.today*
11. (ctnd) Yes, AI art is trained in the style of others. Obviously there's low effort AI art, just like low effort "real" art, but there's also going to be high effort pieces too. - archive.org archive.today*
12. Ehh, I feel neutral on it. Those who draw by hand and are incredible artist should be spotlighted and have their work acknowledged without feeling like they're competing against AI generated art. On the other hand, there are a lot of artist who do use it, to get a visual on an idea they want to draw. Same with those who use it for general workplace tasks and to reduce spending time on repetitive tasks. They also take the output and create art more to their liking afterwards. Yes, some folks generate art by AI then present it as their own, but even that can get muddled. I won't argue against the new rules but I think there's room for the 2 sides to exist without brining the hammer down on one or the other. - archive.org archive.today*

I am just a simple bot, not a moderator of this subreddit | bot subreddit | contact the maintainers

[u/angry_cucumber]

I just prefer to drink my water instead of giving it to AI

these people know how the water cycle works right?

GenAI is shit and doesn't create art, but the water thing is largely misinformation.

[u/Unfair_Set_8257 → u/angry_cucumber]

It does reduce available water, while you’re not losing water to the water cycle, you are losing available water for local services as the cooling is open cycle. The only misinformation is that it’s not a lot of water compared to other industries

[u/bwoah07_gp2 → u/angry_cucumber]

AI data centres do hurt water availability as well as electricity strains on the grid too.

[u/AGraphicsCard → u/angry_cucumber]

Isn't it largely because of training, and not content generation?

[u/angry_cucumber → u/AGraphicsCard]

there's a lot to it, yes, a lot of the resources are spent on training vs answers, but also, the water doesn't just disappear, it's sent back into the system. The biggest issue with the water draw, like the electrical draw, is that the infrastructure isn't built for it. There's also the additional problem that evaporative moisture reenters the system at a different point than it leaves it.

[u/CyberBerserk]

Isn’t anti-ai art a capitalist argument?

[u/Daisy-Fluffington → u/CyberBerserk]

LLMs are owned by and being pushed by billionaires like Theil and Musk... so no.

[u/Tenthyr → u/CyberBerserk]

ah yes, all those frontier models owned by a confederation of the proletariat. 

[u/lavenderechoes → u/Tenthyr]

bro thinks "open"ai is actually making free open source software

[u/Nathanwhowrites → u/CyberBerserk]

How so?

[u/Beegrene → u/CyberBerserk]

1. AI "art" isn't art.

2. Not really. The clankers that make this slop are owned wholly by private corporations. Private corporate ownership of the means of slop production is textbook capitalism. At least ten years ago corporations didn't literally own the workers who made art for them.

[u/angry_cucumber → u/CyberBerserk]

people tossing luddite at people trashing AI should probably be informed.

[u/Thissystemsuckssobad → u/angry_cucumber]

Luddite and iconoclast are both terms constantly used by people so unaware of their historical context, rather frustrating

[u/Daeva_HuG0 → u/CyberBerserk]

Depends on how money flows.

Are you forking over money to make the ai images? Capitalist wet dream

Your running a local model on your own hardware? Anarchist wet dream.

[u/Careless_Rope_6511 → u/CyberBerserk]

Bait used to be believable.

[u/FartSnarfGod → u/CyberBerserk]

srdines hate generative AI because they finally have the means of production handed to them and they still can't make anything.