disabledaiuser

[disabledaiuser]

Looking at some of your work, it is stunning but it is very similar in style to AI artwork, do you have any recommendations for how to tell apart photography like yours from AI.

I've been thinking about this. And this may sound controversial at first, but I'm hoping people will hear me out.

We should stop trying so hard to detect AI art.

I think we should all lift that burden from our brains.

I have often talked about "woke goggles." Where conservatives have lost the ability to enjoy anything because they are hypervigilant about detecting anything woke. They've cursed themselves into just hating everything. All they have left is the "God's Not Dead" Cinematic Universe.

And I worry people are getting AI goggles now. They are so concerned about accidentally enjoying robot art and hurting artists that they have overcorrected to the point where they are hurting artists.

One cannot say "AI is all soulless slop that always looks bad" and then accuse a real artist of making something that looks like AI and not hurt them. By doing so, it includes the baggage of all of the "slop" comments along with it. This crusade is having collateral damage to the very artists we are trying to protect.

Yes, we need to be cautious about malicious AI images. Misinformation and deepfakes are going to be a big problem. People using AI imagery for profit is already a mess. But if you are cruising your feed and like a cool sci-fi robot gal or a photo of a waterfall and it turns out to be AI... that's fine.

It was trained by real artists and AI is going to create some cool shit because of that.

Honestly, I think a lot of the worst slop is because the dipshits creating the prompts have no artistic taste. People keep blaming the AI for how bad it looks and often don't consider it is a product of the loser who published it.

There is plenty of non-slop out there that has fooled me. And, like it or not, it is going to get harder and harder to tell what is AI. Until there are better tools or better regulations, I don't think there is much we can do to avoid enjoying AI art every once in a while. If only by accident.

Current "AI detectors" are mostly a scam. Even the best forensic-level AI image detectors struggle to stay above 70–80% accuracy across a wide range of models and image types. And that's in controlled lab conditions.

Free online tools often drop to near coin-flip accuracy (50–60%), especially with newer image generators and post-processing applied.

The best way to avoid AI imagery is to look at an artist's body of work. It's much harder to create consistent, non-obvious fake images in a large sample size. That is usually enough to have confidence in authenticity. Plus, if they have posted similar art before 2022, you can pretty much rule out any shenanigans.

Otis literally died before genAI was available.

But images you see in the wild, just let yourself enjoy them if that is what your brain wants to do. It'll be okay.

I just think we are attacking this backwards. If we want to protect artists, we need to support them.

Calling out random AI art does not support them.

It does not put money in their pockets.

It does not grow their audience.

Over a decade ago I tried to lead a fight to create better systems of attribution on websites like Reddit and Imgur. I even spoke to the Imgur team after an article was written about me.

I asked them to allow sources on their posts and to develop tech that would help people find where an image came from. They said they were "working on it" and it never manifested.

IMAGE SHARING SITES STEAL MORE FROM ARTISTS THAN AI.

But we just kind of accepted it. No one really joined me in my fight. The prevailing defeatist attitude was, "That's just the way it is."

I think now is the time to demand better attribution systems. We need to be vigilant about making sure as many posts as possible have good sourcing. If an image on Reddit goes viral, the top comment should be the source. And if it isn't, you should try to find it and add it.

Just to be clear, "credit to the original artist" is NOT proper attribution.

And perhaps we can lobby these image sharing sites to create better sourcing systems and tools. They could even use fucking AI to find the earliest posted version of an image.

And it would be nice if it didn't require people to go into the comments to find the source. It could just be in the headline. They could even create little badges "made by a human" for verified artists.

Good attribution helps artists grow their audience. It is one of the single most effective things you can do to help them.

I literally just got this message...

There are maybe 10 popular artists who I helped grow their audience early on. Just because I reblogged their work and added links to all of their social media. I even hired my best friend to add sourcing information to every post because I believed so much in good attribution.

Calling out AI art may feel good in the moment. You caught someone trying to trick people and it feels like justice. But, in most cases, the tangible benefits to real artists seem small. It impedes your ability to enjoy art without always being suspicious. And the risk of telling someone you think they make soulless slop doesn't seem worth it.

But putting that time and effort into attribution *would* be worth it. I have proven it time and time again.

I also think people should consider having a monthly art budget. I don't care if it is $5. But if we all commit to seeking out cool artists and being their collective patrons, we could really make a difference and keep real art alive. Just commit to finding a cool new artist every month and financially contributing to them in some way.

On a bigger scale I think advocating for universal basic income, art grants for education and creation, and government regulation of AI would all be helpful long term goals. Though I think our friends in Europe may have to take the lead on regulation at the moment.

So...

Stop worrying about enjoying or calling out AI art.

Demand better attribution from image sharing sites.

Make sure all art has a source listed.

Start an art budget.

Advocate for better regulations.

[disabledaiuser]

When you refer to AI art as slop, you're using an antisemitic dogwhistle. Look up "goyslop", if you need further context.

The truth is, that the nazis on 4chan agree with all your criticisms of AI. They believe that it's a tool invented and wielded by lazy thieves who are trying to make our country's youth lazy, stupid, and immoral. Guess who they think the lazy thieves are.

They believe it represents a moral backslide, a degeneration of values and an erosion of the definition of art. Guess how they define real art.

When you say AI art lacks something "human", that it lacks some fundamental quality of the "human spirit", know that you are echoing the sentiments of these fascists, who believe that AI art lacks the qualities of and subverts the artistic legacy produced by the aryan racial spirit. Your argument is the same as theirs. You just sub in a vague term to replace the original overt racism.

I mean, last time I checked, it's a technology that humans made, right? Not space aliens. When you're asked to dehumanize AI art, you're being asked to dehumanize all the people involved in making it.

When you criticize AI art on the basis of its failure to reproduce reality as-is, on the basis of its production of malformed or disabled bodies, you are again echoing the eugenicists. The race scientists and nazis who believed that impressionism, cubism, and surrealism were forms that reflected the degenerate and innately criminal bodies and minds that were alleged to have produced such art. To say now, that AI artists are stealing something from "true" "real" artists who have cultivated some sacred skill and exist as exemplars of human expression and culture, is to align yourself with the rhetoric of fascists.

In truth, there is no theft. If AI image generators were plainly "collage machines" we'd be able to then confirm that collage-making is a recognized art form that doesn't qualify as theft. But they're not "cutting up and mashing" art together. That's a lie. Invented by the people who fed you all those other garbage, fascist arguments. I wonder why they would lie to you like that? 🤔

When you fall back on the most tired, most self-damning argument of all- it takes no effort, they're being lazy, just pushing a button!! Just learn how to paint!!!

It all kind of falls apart, doesn't it? Even if AI had magically appeared from space and had required no programmers to design, and had not required countless people to label images, build datasets, or train the AIs, required no artistic process of investigation, iteration, refinement, or labor hours from the most dedicated AI artists, what would be wrong with wanting to see novel art at a low effort? What exactly would be wrong with that?

Please, try to find an answer that doesn't make you sound like the most conservative boomer stereotype ever.

Please, try to find an answer that doesn't appeal to some of the most draconian, anti-art and anti-artist strictures to ever exist, Intellectual Property laws.

~~~

After all, how do you feel about cameras? How do you feel about other machines that produce art? That are, on the face of it, "only pushing a button"?

How do you feel about readymades, about Fountain by Duchamp?

How do you feel about fascism? About reactionary fears and anxieties about losing your precarious place in the economic hierarchy? About banding together as a community to push these invaders and thieves out? About not being able to provide for yourself in this tide of oncoming degeneracy?

Are you scared? Are you afraid they'll take our jobs? Are you afraid they'll corrupt our children?

Aren't you angry about the injustice of it?

Don't you just want the people in charge to be willing to make laws to protect you? To protect you from this sick, vile, not-art? These gutter paintings?

Don't these criminals just deserve the worst?

Well?

[disabledaiuser]

you should clearly state your ""art"" is ai in the caption. you KNOW most people dont check a full blog before rbing. its intentionally dishonest and misleading.

okay sure lemme just

there we go!

[disabledaiuser]

hope is a skill

[disabledaiuser]

I will never forgive the AI art debate for bringing inspiration porn bang up to date. yass girl use disabled artists as a tool for an argument and then continue to boldly ignore disabled art. you're being so original the way you're using disabled heroes as a bludgeon against other disabled people. awesomee we've all been talking and we think your reference to mozart really made this debate swing in your favour. nobody even noticed that you meant to reference beethoven. go to hell

[disabledaiuser]

hey so this is a bad thing.

we can all agree having police intimidate someone over making the "wrong" kind of art is an objectively bad thing regardless of how you feel about AI, yes?

[disabledaiuser]

We are reaching extremely dangerous levels of IP Brain here.

[disabledaiuser]

Really proud of how this new song came out. Lyrics by me, imagined through Udio.

[Verse 1] Floating under the eyes of god The whole world inside my mouth Angels guarding my left and right The bubblegum pain pay no mind

(Pre-chorus) I'm just a spirit haunting the clay Ahhhh…….. When will I ever be given a say?

[Chorus] Dentistry, rapture me! Angels, fixer up fiends Crucify, rising high! Listen, I am unseen

[Verse 2] My whole world crumbles from within You say you can fix and fill-in But why was I not molded whole? I'll fly high and take flight with my soul (Pre-chorus) I'm just a spirit haunting the clay Ahhhh…….. When will I ever be given a say?

[Chorus] Dentistry, rapture me! Angels, fixer up fiends Crucify, rising high! Listen, I am unseen

[disabledaiuser]

See, I've seen a lot of comparisons like this. But coming from someone who has absolutely no skin in this game, from an outside perspective it's looked a lot more like a guy got in a car and all of a sudden someone ran up and started banging on his windows shouting that he shouldn't drive that car.

And the guy in the car was like "I'm just going down the street, and the car is the easiest way to do that", and the guy outside was like "um actually, if you can't enjoy the feeling of running then you shouldn't be going places, and taking joy in the freedom of movement is literally what makes us human and your soulless machine can never replace that feeling."

And the guy in the car was like "okay, but my leg is broken and I can't walk." And the guy outside was like "Nice try but I know plenty of people with broken legs who hop and crawl along the ground without having to use that gas-guzzling pollution machine, so actually YOU'RE the ableist for suggesting that you need it to move."

And the guy in the car was like "well this is actually a race car and while of course it's not the same as a marathon, driving a race car takes its own set of skills and talents that I've practiced and developed over time", and the guy outside was like "yeah right, everyone knows that driving a car doesn't take talent, just putting your foot on the gas doesn't make you a racer."

And the guy in the car was like "okay, well, I'm gonna keep driving I think", and the guy outside was like "oh my god you "drivers" are SO pathetic, you just can't stand that everyone knows that you're talentless hacks who don't understand the true meaning of racing. Why can't you just leave us real racers alone?!"

[disabledaiuser]

I love AI.

[disabledaiuser]

Cope.

hearing my sister say “I love AI” and knowing what went down last time I had a reaction to similar statements in her presence so now I just have to sit. Feral and twitching. Maybe clawing at the drywall and chewing on my computer

[disabledaiuser]

Downward Spiral | Outer Darkness Part 3

do you know what it's like to be trapped in your own mind, and yet, barred from the fullness of an infinite mindspace?

Bonus Animations:

[disabledaiuser]

creating art with ai can be like... chasing an emotion, an idea. following a river of vibes and impressions, piecing together disparate parts to properly convey something that words alone cannot express. the workflow is really conducive for emotional work, because its not just about... thinking of a singular image and trying to draw or paint that image. its taking concepts, aesthetic, emotion, vibe, bits and pieces as you go, recombining, reconveying over and over again in search of what you want to be saying, in search of your own experience externalized. this is prolly why you don't see singular images when people post ai art as much. you see sets of images. because its a process, and the end product is not a singular thing, it is the journey of what you discover and create in search of something. you are taking along the creative journey in image sets and thats valuable.

[disabledaiuser]

Downward Spiral | Outer Darkness Part 2

[disabledaiuser]

Downward Spiral | Outer Darkness Part 1

[disabledaiuser]

Genuine question for all my fellow anti-AI people out there: have we talked with the older generation about it?

My dad is pretty pro-AI and we constantly butt heads about it but tonight he made some decent points I’m curious if anyone can educate me on. He mentioned that

(1) AI is already out of the box, we can’t put it back in. Since it exists, there’s no way it’s going away because too many people have experienced that shortcut and thus will complain if they lose it.

(2) people said the same things surrounding the internet, smart phones, CDs, DVDs, etc. Anytime technology advances, alarms are sounded about how dangerous it can be. He mentioned remembering journalists fearing for their jobs when newspapers started posting articles online (I mentioned how we now have a lot of misinformation circulating to which he conceded but mentioned how newspapers are also biased about what they release, meaning easier censorship which is half right I get where he’s coming from).

(3) while I still firmly believe people should just utilize their own creativity even if that means bad art, there ARE some decent accessibility aspects to generative AI for people with learning disabilities, processing disorders, or communicating in a different language.

(4) the environmental impact is of course very bad and impacted many peoples lives who live near AI data centers, however my dad mentioned there are countless other harmful practices that make MORE of a negative impact that we can focus on so it shouldn’t be the main argument against AI.

(5) he agreed that capitalism is the root of the problem, but we still have a long way to go before removing that from society. So as it stands, if AI can help people save time in aspects they aren’t skilled in and can’t afford to hire someone, it falls under the blanket of “no ethical consumption is possible.” An example is redesigning a laundry room. He can use AI to get a general plan and inspiration for the space then use his own skills to make it happen rather than hiring an interior designer and contractors.

Hopefully my rambles made sense. I’m still fairly anti-AI but these points gave me something to think about and I wanted other’s opinions on it!

[disabledaiuser]

Found this on reddit. Just remember, this is legit what antis look/act like. They posted this themselves. Old man yells at cloud. The anti movement will pass. It is reactionary outrage. It will pass.