• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

Discussion about A.I.

Go to CruxDreams.com
Doragon

Doragon

Tribune
Since this site offers a lot of stories and artwork produced by members, I think we need a discussion about how to respond to A.I. products. Also because I already have seen it seeping in.

In the media (at least in my country) there is a lot of dumb admiration for the new technology. My own stand in this is the opposite: I find it disgusting. A machine has no idea what it actually is producing, I find it a dangerous development and people using A.I. to help them produce something, are frauds in my opinion. Furthermore, I really don't think we should teach machines how to torture people, just in case they actually become intelligent in the future - right now they are far from intelligent and in many ways we should keep them as stupid as they are now.

I would prefer a ban on A.I. products on this site and I am curious how others feel about it.

Just my 2 cents,

Doragon
 
Doragon said:
Since this site offers a lot of stories and artwork produced by members, I think we need a discussion about how to respond to A.I. products. Also because I already have seen it seeping in.

In the media (at least in my country) there is a lot of dumb admiration for the new technology. My own stand in this is the opposite: I find it disgusting. A machine has no idea what it actually is producing, I find it a dangerous development and people using A.I. to help them produce something, are frauds in my opinion. Furthermore, I really don't think we should teach machines how to torture people, just in case they actually become intelligent in the future - right now they are far from intelligent and in many ways we should keep them as stupid as they are now.

I would prefer a ban on A.I. products on this site and I am curious how others feel about it.

Just my 2 cents,

Doragon
Click to expand...
The problem is how would anyone identify that a story was written by AI if it was submitted by a human member? I think for a known writer here with a distinct style (he modestly says...) it would appear not quite like them, but with a new member I don't know how you would tell. Even professional writers are using AI as an aid, with caution to be sure, to find the right word or in research

Behind a paywall, but here's one https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/21/opinion/chatgpt-journalism.html

I would suspect that if you look at self-published stuff on Amazon or Smashwords there is probably some there, and again, how would you tell for sure?
 
Well... some users here could already be A.I. and not real "humans" ...
I'm pretty sure "they" are around ... reading, posting pics ... even promoting bans against A.I. content!

... maybe too late to stop "THEM"
 
I personally am a nut for technology, and any tool that helps to create an image from my mind, I use. I was using Poser over twenty years ago. I now use a program called VAM and AI. My goal has always been to create the most realistic looking images possible. I HAD been working to create crux images that looked like photos, using VAM and AI. If you think this is easy, you have never used any of these technologies. Due to threads like this, I have abandoned that project and will not be posting any more images here.

MH
 
Doragon said:
Since this site offers a lot of stories and artwork produced by members, I think we need a discussion about how to respond to A.I. products. Also because I already have seen it seeping in.

In the media (at least in my country) there is a lot of dumb admiration for the new technology. My own stand in this is the opposite: I find it disgusting. A machine has no idea what it actually is producing, I find it a dangerous development and people using A.I. to help them produce something, are frauds in my opinion. Furthermore, I really don't think we should teach machines how to torture people, just in case they actually become intelligent in the future - right now they are far from intelligent and in many ways we should keep them as stupid as they are now.

I would prefer a ban on A.I. products on this site and I am curious how others feel about it.

Just my 2 cents,

Doragon
Click to expand...
If you find it disgusting and if you are able to distinguish which post is ai and which by human you can ignore it...simple as that, I don't find any reason the rest of us to miss the benefits of the technology.

People who use AI in order to produce something are frauds? I will not comment on that...
 
Tree says there is no 'right' answer.

When color film came out, people said it would ruin photography. It changed it but didn't ruin it.

When various Photoshops came out they said the same... it did not.

Cheap use of AI is as visible as crappy use of photoshops. Neither is art.

So everyone calm down. If you use AI do it well. If you 'hate' AI skip the threads.
 
thehangingtree said:
So everyone calm down. If you use AI do it well. If you 'hate' AI skip the threads.
Click to expand...
I generally just have that approach.
Some people can "relieve" themselves using inflatable dolls, I can't.
Some people like spirit-less creations, I don't.
For me a good part of the appeal behind creations by a person is the "window into their dark fantasies" and the ability to have an exchange, if I am lucky. Neither is possible with AI.
The real concern though: A flood of AI is literally drowning all platforms to the point where you cannot find the pearl between all the shit-beans any more. THIS is my true concern. It creates a ton of cost for the sites, at zero value
 
I agree with Tree. I think, if there is something about using AI that might be problematic, it would be when people use an AI program to create a lot of versions of images, without a lot of input from a human artist (sort of automatic images) and "dump" them on the forums as if they were original artwork.

I personally see no problem with using any photo editing tool, AI, rendering engine, etc. for enhancing the quality of an artist's work, which is what Mermaidhunter is suggesting. I think that's perfectly fine. Painters criticized photographers in the early days, saying that it wasn't really art, because all the photographer had to do was push a button, or point a lens at something. We know now that it's just a different sort of art (not "painting"). Similarly, photoshop can be used to "fake" things, but it can also be used to put together manips and other composite images which are arguably art, even if they are not "straight" photography. AI is the same. It's a new tool that, as Mermaidhunter notes, can improve the visual quality of a rendered image.

So, let's all stay calm and enjoy the vision of our artists, and refrain from disparaging the use of individual artistic technologies. We benefit more from that kind of approach.
 
Fantasmo said:
The real concern though: A flood of AI is literally drowning all platforms to the point where you cannot find the pearl between all the shit-beans any more. THIS is my true concern.
Click to expand...
Mine as well. Several publishers are already complaining of the enormous increase of novels offered that are mostly written with the aid of A.I. and it's of poor quality as well.

Jollyrei said:
AI is the same. It's a new tool
Click to expand...
I don't agree it's the same as photography or photoshop and it's not just a tool. A tool is used by a human being and requires an eye and a hand, skill and inspriation. With A.I. you can give the computer the task to produce a hundred images with certain parameters and you basically do nothing as an artist. Hell, in my country there's even an artgallery now, with computer generated artists making computer generated art. No humans are involved, except for the printing and selling of the pieces.

mermaidhunter said:
My goal has always been to create the most realistic looking images possible.
Click to expand...

I appreciate that and possibly A.I. can be used for that. From your message I get that you want to create something, yourself, with any means necessary. That's not what I am protesting against, I hope you understand what I am saying.
 
Doragon said:
Mine as well. Several publishers are already complaining of the enormous increase of novels offered that are mostly written with the aid of A.I. and it's of poor quality as well.


I don't agree it's the same as photography or photoshop and it's not just a tool. A tool is used by a human being and requires an eye and a hand, skill and inspriation. With A.I. you can give the computer the task to produce a hundred images with certain parameters and you basically do nothing as an artist. Hell, in my country there's even an artgallery now, with computer generated artists making computer generated art. No humans are involved, except for the printing and selling of the pieces.



I appreciate that and possibly A.I. can be used for that. From your message I get that you want to create something, yourself, with any means necessary. That's not what I am protesting against, I hope you understand what I am saying.
Click to expand...
CF has rules that prevent 'dumping' of mass produced pictures, one being the 'Five per day' rule. Also there is discretion that can be used if someone is following the rule but still dumping. It won't get unnoticed.
 
Doragon said:
Mine as well. Several publishers are already complaining of the enormous increase of novels offered that are mostly written with the aid of A.I. and it's of poor quality as well.
Click to expand...
Hi, a thing I would understand. You furnish let's say about ten of your stories. Then you ask a story happening, let's say, during Musa dagh events (armenian genocide), how AI could know all the details you would be able to write ?
 
Doragon said:
Mine as well. Several publishers are already complaining of the enormous increase of novels offered that are mostly written with the aid of A.I. and it's of poor quality as well.
Click to expand...
They may have to return to the old model where publishers actually read the submissions and exercise some editorial judgements of quality before they publish. They would likely use AI for the initial screening and have human editors making the final judgement. Machines keeping watch over other machines.

@Jollyrei @thehangingtree I do see the parallels with what was said about photography, Photoshop etc. But, some very smart and knowledgeable people feel that AI is a potentially existential threat to humankind. No one ever said that about photography. I think it's too early to say, but it's possible they are right. If so, then somewhat better pictures of girls being crucified will be very little compensation for all of us being rendered obsolete...Rage Against the Machine....
 
Last edited:
windar said:
some very smart and knowledgeable people feel that AI is a potentially existential threat to humankind. No one ever said that about photography. I think it's too early to say, but it's possible they are right. If so, then somewhat better pictures of girls being crucified will be very little compensation for all of us being rendered obsolete...Rage Against the Machine....
Click to expand...
An interesting notion, to be sure, but I doubt the use of AI in producing crux pictures is what will destroy humanity. As an imminent existential threat, it's down the list at present, I would suggest.
 
windar said:
some very smart and knowledgeable people feel that AI is a potentially existential threat to humankind. No one ever said that about photography. I think it's too early to say, but it's possible they are right.
Click to expand...
'The end of mankind' has been predicted about many new things. Somehow we have managed to survive...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom