/cyb/ - Cyberpunk Fiction and Fact

>>1551
How?

>>1552
Art is inherently human. The creators of that technological abomination aspire to mimic first and then to claim they can replace man with it.
Fake and gay.

>>1553
AIs, like all other technology, are merely tools. They won't replace humans, but artists may use them to generate concept art or for other practical purposes.
People used to think acrylic paint was abominable because it did away with the need for artists to harvest the materials of their paints from nature. Technology changes, and so does art.

>>1553
>claim they can replace man
It'll streamline the art process at most. Artists benefit more than anyone.
The only "artists" who'll be replaced by automation are talentless hacks who's only skills are sliding a pencil across paper. While painting, writing and use of artistic elements (lighting, color, symbolism, emotionally evocative imagery, etc) can be mastered by machines through formula and algorithms, actual creative vision and abstract thought can still only be done by humans, because the creative aspect art is subjective, rather than objective.
Just look at the images above. They make great use of all the elements of art, and the images themselves are beautiful and evocative, but they're not really saying anything. The machine was able to algorithmically generate images that illicit responses from humans, but the machine itself had nothing to say, so it's just uncanny nonsense when you examine it closely.

That being said, these AI generated artworks are fun to look at, and I had a laugh reading AI generated greentexts. I think AI images and text have great potential for entertainment and shitposting. The automation enables people without the skills to draw to generate images based on their artistic visions, and that's pretty cool.

>>1556
>It'll streamline the art process at most. Artists benefit more than anyone.
It stands to how the technology evolves. The better it gets, the lower the demand for artists will be.

>>1574
It shifts art from those with training and time spent to art that is 'directed'.
With the way that's available it'll be possible to have distinct 'assests' within a work that is seperate form the artwork as a whole.
The demand for art would remain the same, artists in the traditional sense might be niche. Which could lead to high arts.
Those with that skill set might be pushed to where programs lack at that point in time. Such as animations.

>>1574
>The better it gets, the lower the demand for artists will be.
Absurd. Art is an expression of the soul, not a traded commodity, except perhaps the usual merchants.

>>1578
>not a traded commodity
It is absolutely a commodity. It's a skilled practice that people pay money for.
If you want art of your pony OC, you either learn to draw or hire an artist to draw it for you, which is a service you pay for based on the skills of the craftsman and the market price of the commission.

>>1578
That argument does have value. But like, I still need to make a living, mate. Either pay, or wait for cortana to replace me.

>>1579
>It is absolutely a commodity.
As I said... the usual merchant. When are art and money are mixed, corruption ensues.
>skills of the craftsman
That's not art.

>>1580
Any artist driven by money is not giving the best of himself, but the best to please a customer.

>>1581
>>1582
I was talking about jobs in jeopardy. If you want to place another goalpost, that's fine by me.

>>1583
>jobs in jeopardy
If the production depends on a monetary reward, can be that output be called art? Many will say yes, but I prefer to look it down as an impure art.

>>1584
Okay, but what about all those artists who draw for a living? Is their art not art?
What about all of the art that was requested or commissioned by paying customers (a large amount of pony art) is that not art?

Whatever you want to label it, art or not art, there's a market element to this trade, and technology has serious potential to change it, just like it changed the animation industry.

Picasso self-portrait redrawn by an AI.

>>1586
>Picasso self-portrait
Absolutely degenerate.

>>1585
>there's a market element to this trade, and technology has serious potential to change it,
It reminds me of uncle Ted.

>>1581
>the usual merchant
That's bullshit. Not all paid art is Jewish.
You don't think any of the commissioned pony content that has been produced over the past decade was legitimate? None of it was art, because it was done for money?
Even the great renaissance artist: Donatello, Raphael, Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci; all of them worked for commission. They created legendary works of art that took time and skill not just because they wanted to, but because someone else requested and financed their work. They had to study anatomy without textbooks, harvest and mix the materials for their paints, and research artistic elements to do so, and for that they were paid hefty sums of money. Today, we don't need to do those things because technology lets us use search engines to find images and we can just go to the store and buy paint, but it's still paid commissions for a skilled job.

>>1589
Okay, I concede. Not all art made for money is bad.

https://twitter.com/images_ai/status/1566894893854752770

^ This thread can also be an example of some of the limitations of AI. AI works to meet expectations given a prompt, but it can't fully comprehend creative vision.

>>1594
The right hand has only 4 fingers.

>>1598
It also sucks.

AI Movie poster

>>1623
>>1624
These look great.

>>1625
Ikr. So real!

>>1626
I feel like the AI is decent at pseudo-impressionism. It's able to evoke the momentary effects of light and color in a way that takes contemporary artists a while to master completely.
I feel this this could be a really useful tool for artists in the future.

>>1627
>I feel this this could be a really useful tool for artists in the future.
You mean to attempt to replace them.

>>1628
It'll only replace shitty artists who's only skill is sliding pencils across paper.
Real artists will exploit these tools in their artisanal process to create amazing new works never before possible.
It'll be like the transition from traditional art to digital art. The tools/media change, but artists still use them.

>try generating pokemon
>get ugly shit
>try making better versions
>turns out tons of youtubers have done this
Oh

>>1631
Which system are you using? The publicly available ones have limited capacity.

>>1630
Except digital art didn't drew itself.

>>1632
I don't know if this is the right one but it's what I used https://huggingface.co/spaces/dalle-mini/dalle-mini

>>1633
I don't think this is going to "replace" anyone. It's just a tool.

Looks like Stable Diffusion is a promising image AI
https://github.com/Maks-s/sd-akashic
Install Guide: https://rentry.org/voldy

Link to install guide taken from 4chan /g/ thread https://boards.4channel.org/g/thread/88539579

>>1635
It remains to be seen. It may as well be on its infancy right now.

>>1637
Well, I would be impressed if it actually ever manages to replace artists entirely. The AI is not that advanced yet. The creative process still needs human input.

Played a bit with Stable Diffusion.
I think it lacks a good training set for ponies. But it still manages to make some resemblance from keywords like "twilight sparkle" and "mlp".

>>1639
Not half bad, tbh.

>>1641
Yes from only very limited knowledge of the show it is not bad. When you feed it keywords it is trained on it is really good.

Some art generated by Stable Diffusion from /g/ thread

>>1644
>>1645
That's pretty cool.

>>1646
Yes, it is really fun to play with and fairly easy to get up and running if you have Nvidia GPU (with 3GB or more VRAM). Sadly I only have a 3GB card so it is slow-ish (1-2 minutes per image) and I can't make big images. But it makes me want to save up to get better GPU so I can make big images. Hopefully there will be an model trained on Pony images made available that all can use sometime in the future.

>>1647
>Sadly I only have a 3GB card so it is slow-ish
Mine is 256MB.

>>1648
>Mine is 256MB.
Ouch. And Touche.

>>1644
>>1645
These are pretty good.

>>1628
>You mean to attempt to replace them.
Why are there so many people acting threatened by this? What real harm would actually come out of this technology?
The art market is already pozzed beyond measure. Adding a bit of automation so that consumers can use computers to get images from prompts can't be that terrible. It's just another source of images.

>>1639
Yeah I think Stable Diffusion is promising for pony art, there is someone working on training the AI on his own site so it can work with more pony art and also pornagraphic art too since non of these AI aren't trained on such art. Don't think he would want it spread too far at the moment but they are also working on a chat bot AI to work with it too.

One thing it's really good at right now is muscular women pin ups though for those /sp/ posters hanging around

>>1652
I really hope a training model for mlp will be made available at one point so we all can enjoy the glory it can produce.
It is amazing what Stable Diffusion can make, and you don't have to break the bank running it. Also the fact that most gaming computers can utilize it without any problem already (at least if Nvidia card) is truly fantastic.

>>1651
Besides, interpreting the clusterfucky mess some AIs can shit out into a good piece of art takes imagination and artistic skill.

>>1654
I'm certainly having fun with it.

>>1651
>Why are there so many people acting threatened by this?
AI art is superior and they know that they can't compete. Simple as.
It's gonna be so good watching white collar jobs get fucked out of existence by automation.

Disney trailer sheboon vs AI redhead qt

It can even do furry porn. Holy shit. A large market just opened up.

>>1651
>Why are there so many people acting threatened by this?
It is trivializing humanity and turning art into a mass produced commodity. Look it this way, there is natural not chemical tainted food, and there is industrial GMO food meant to replace the former. The final outcome is obvious and undesired.

>>1660
Art has been trivialized and mass produced for centuries. This is just another way to produce images quickly.
People with good taste will learn to tell the difference. There's no major harm in the long run.

>>1661
>There's no major harm in the long run.
Say that to the food chain supply and look how it goes.

>>1662
Art isn't food. The art market is already pozzed beyond measure, and if furry porn artists can't compete with machines then they must've not been that good to begin with.

>>1660
Brand name clothing isn't more expensive or desired because it is of a higher quality.
You pay for the name so you can signal to your materialist friends what a fanatically insecure materialist you are.
It might even attract some golddigging whores, and get some shallow rich girls to see you as a person and treat you better than they would treat a man in cheaper clothes.
Art produced by humans will always retain the value of the name it is attached to.
What is AI art attached to? The AI's name? The quality of the art you trained the AI on, and how well that art is known?
I see AI art becoming a fad. It will be exciting for a while, and then it will be abused until it becomes as cringe as NFTs.
Even though not all NFTs are overpriced monkey pics and many artists out there like selling their art using NFTs but whatever.
Youtubers will make more "I made x with AI" videos until it gets old. And keep making them until they get hated.
Artists will still use AI to help produce rough drafts and reference marerial even if they keep quiet about it.

>>1657
>Disney trailer sheboon
I want to vomit.

>>1665
Ariel is misinformed about life on the surface yet fascinated by it anyway because she knows none of the shit that casts her fetishized race in a bad light. She's separated from them by the species barrier like whites are from blacks. She has to give up her voice to an obese witch to fundamentally change herself and gain the ability to be a part of their world, rise to the surface, nearly drowning in the process because her old home is no longer something anyone like the incredibly white Prince Eric can live in. Her father, king of the nonhumans, forbids racemixing, and she violates that anyway.

Make Ariel or Eric nonwhite and you add a weird racial aspect to the movie that really doesn't belong here.

Make Eric black and she only idolizes his culture because she doesn't know about the bad parts. Make Ariel black and she can't swim, and the relationship was only possible in the first place because she went out of her way to reject her father and be less black.

It would be like taking Cloud Strife's struggle to be a man, and fucking that up by making him a tranny in the remake. Or making Pinnochio a tranny.

>>1664
>Art produced by humans will always retain the value of the name it is attached to.
So what? In this scenario, demand would still sink to the bottom wiping out a fuck-ton of jobs in multiple industries.
>Youtubers will make more "I made x with AI" videos until it gets old. And keep making them until they get hated.
I don't get why fags keep assuming this is a nothing burger. No body knows, this technology may as well be on its infancy in terms of quality and precision. This perpetual downplaying may as well be artist cope if looked at it from another angle.
>>1663
>implying only furfags and degenerates are at risk of loosing their meme jobs
>>1661
>Continuously assuming shit like a coping artist
>>1656
No job is safe. If AI can replace human art. They can pretty much replace anything humans do. Including menial labor, which is certainly long overdue.

>>1668
>They can pretty much replace anything humans do. Including menial labor, which is certainly long overdue.
Menial labor has always be prescribed for jews and gypsies.

>>1670
>defacing Purple
Heresy.

>>1671
I'm looking forward to the day we get a real pony model to use with Simple Diffusion and get to generate images that are more true to the show.
Here is the interpretation using "My Little Pony standing in the rain drawn by Rembrandt" and not specifying pony.

>>1672
>Simple Diffusion
Stable Diffusion..... Words are hard

AI PUSSY
https://derpibooru.org/images/2944726

>>1675
Nice. Can't wait for the model used to generate is shared.

>>1675
>horsepussy
It's good.

>>1675
>>1676
>>1677
Its over for artists

>>1678
Have you considered getting into politics, Mr. Hitler?

>>1679
Maybe i should

>>1681
WOW.

>>1681
Based horse.

>>1697
They fear AI because it threatens their power.

Lots of shitpost potential with this.

>>1702
Definitely that's degenerate art.

>>1664
>I see AI art becoming a fad. It will be exciting for a while, and then it will be abused until it becomes as cringe as NFTs.
I don't think it'll be just a fad. I think it's here to stay. Interest will wane overtime, but the enormous convenience it gives shitposters in generating pics from prompts will continue to stoke new content.