this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
361 points (92.1% liked)

Fuck AI

1687 readers
208 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Source (Bluesky)

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] gex@lemmy.world 93 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm a digital chef, I prompt the dish I want into doordash and it shows up in my home in 45 minutes.

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hey, you forgot to say "using AI"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 62 points 1 week ago (10 children)

Being good at prompting AI to generate art is like being good at using a search engine to find a specific picture.

~~Search engine~~ AI artists!

[–] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

AI-generated art is an incredible tool for art design. I used to spend countless hours sifting through Google images, trying to piece together mood boards or find references for very specific concepts. Now, with AI, I can quickly generate visuals that capture the exact mood, style, or design I'm aiming for, saving both time and effort.

However, I view AI art as a starting point, not the final product. Once I’ve developed a clear visual direction, I hand these concepts over to a skilled artist to bring the idea to life with depth, creativity, and a human touch that AI simply can’t replicate. AI streamlines the creative process, but it doesn’t replace the artistry and nuance that only human creators can deliver.

[–] kshade@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago

It's a lot like commissioning something from an artist. You have to describe what you want, with the style, details and mood you want to see, then maybe go back and forth a few times until it's just right. Doing that well is a skill, so are things like art direction. But replacing the humans executing on the direction with a machine doesn't suddenly make the directing human an artist.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Rooty@lemmy.world 43 points 1 week ago (3 children)

5000 years later:

"And here we see a fertility figure, commonly worshipped in the late Microplastic era".

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

"And this one is the goddess of youthfulness in adults. According to remaining Tweets, while she looks like she's a 10 year old, she's actually a 9000 year old dragon, who chooses to have this form, and is actually able to give consent to sexual encounters, and is so promisculous she needs frequent corrections. This cult seems to be widely persecuted according to other tweets, in the form of what they called as "cancel culture", since many outsiders thought it would encourage the harm of actual children, and some participants of this cult unfortunately had such occurences."

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 42 points 1 week ago (9 children)

By coincidence, a friend just posted this elsewhere:

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"Nothing will stop real artists from making art."

I think this is kinda an empty sentiment. Nobody is trying to stop artists from making art. They're just trying to stop paying a lot of them for their art.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They didn’t claim anyone was trying to stop them from making art. In the context of the rest of the post, that is about how a lack of a specific tool or software won’t stop artists from creating art.

You’re spot on about them trying to stop paying people for art, though.

[–] hmmm@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago

This is a true triumph of the human spirit.

[–] recklessengagement@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

It's the one rock actually

[–] JustVik@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If you really understand what your tools do (not how tools do it), you are a true professional (in this case, an artist). You use some tools to achieve a certain effect and you know what it will be like. AI "artists" don't know what AI will do for them in the next moment. At least something like that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RustyNova@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

As much as I like this post, it ain't true for digital 3d artists. While you can lay down some objects and stuff, it's still extremely limited.

[–] jqubed@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I could be wrong but my impression has been a lot of 3D artists often have sculpting backgrounds or parallel interests because they carry a lot of the same general compositional principles.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 1 week ago

Even a 3D artist who has never used clay before is going to be able to make something from it that looks good, just because so many of the same artistic principles and methods of thinking about how to modify what you’re working on to get the result you want still apply.

Give an AI ‘artist’ anything other than a plagiarism machine and suddenly they can’t do anything, because they don’t want to actually put in the time and effort to understand art beyond ‘this one looks good and this one doesn’t’.

[–] Carnelian@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What are the limitations? Not trying to start a fight, just wondering what’s on your mind that couldn’t be made in diorama form

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Are 3d artists the same thing as AI bros?

No, they are not.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] paultimate14@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Among other criticisms, "using technology" does not mean something is "digital". The example on the rock seems to be analog from everything in the post above.

[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 29 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

They weren’t saying that the rock art was digital art.

They’re saying that as an artist whose medium of choice is digital, they can still make art in other mediums and that any artist will be able to do the same, no matter their medium.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] tektite 9 points 1 week ago

They used their digits to make it!

load more comments
view more: next ›