#and the environmental impact llms and image generators are currently creating

[canadianlucifer]

it's so sad that i can't say "I love AI!" without a million asterisks

[fandomtrumpshate]

Our Stance On Gen-AI

This year, for the first time, we've had a couple of reports from bidders that the FTH fanworks they received were produced using generative AI. For that reason, we've decided that it's important that we lay out a specific, concrete policy going forward.

Generative AI tools are not welcome here.

Non-exhaustive list of examples:

image generators like Imagen, Midjourney, and similar

video generators like Sora, Runway, and similar

LLMs like ChatGPT and similar

audio generators like ElevenLabs, MusicLM, and similar

Participants found to have used generative AI to produce a fanwork, in part or in whole, for their bidder(s) will be permanently banned from participating in future iterations of Fandom Trumps Hate.

Why?

We understand that there can be contentious debate around the use of generative AI, we know individual people have their own reasons for being in favor of it, and we recognize that many people may simply be unaware that these tools come with any negative impacts at all. Regardless, we are firm in our stance on this for the following (non-exhaustive) list of key reasons in no particular order:

negative, unregulated environmental impact

Over the years, you may have noticed that we’ve supported multiple environmental organizations doing important work to combat climate change, preserve wildlife, and advocate for renewable and sustainable energy policy changes. Generative AI tools produce a startling amount of e-waste, can require massive amounts of storage space and computational power, and are a (currently unregulated) drain on natural resources. Using these tools to produce a fanwork flies in the face of every environmental organization we have supported to date.

plagiarism and lack of artistic integrity

Most if not all generative AI models are trained on some amount of stolen work (across various mediums). As a result, any output generated by these models is at worst plagiarized and at best extremely derivative and unoriginal. In our opinion, using generative AI tools to produce a fanwork demonstrates a lack of care for your own craft, a lack of respect for the work of other creators, and a lack of respect for your bidder and your commitment to them.

undermining our community building impact

One of the best things to come out of the auction every year—we can't even call it a side benefit, because it's so central to us—is that bidders and creators form collaborative relationships which sometimes even turn into friendship. Using generative AI undermines that trust and collaboration.

undermining the value of participating as a creator

Bidders participate in Fandom Trumps Hate for the opportunity to prompt YOU to create a fanwork for them, in YOUR style with YOUR specific skill set. Any potential bidder is perfectly capable of dropping a prompt into a generative AI tool on their own time, if they wish. We hope all creators sign up with the aim to play a role more significant than “unnecessary middleman.”

In general, we try to be as flexible as we can in our policies to allow for the best experience possible for all Fandom Trumps Hate participants. This, however, is something we are not willing to be flexible on. We realize this may seem unusually rigid, but we ask that you trust we have given this serious consideration and respect that while we are willing to answer clarifying questions, we are not open to debate on this topic.

[entropy-cat]

I may be a bit late to this, but as someone who has more insight into the workings of AI, I wanted to write a quality longpost on "13 Reasons Why You Shouldn't Be Using Generative AI to Make Fanart", so buckle up. 1. Environmental impact I need all of you to know, generative AI shits out a CO2 brick per prompt. Every time you generate a fanfiction image, you are dooming another rare species of a beetle in the Amazon rainforest to extinction. I wish I were exaggarating, but I am not. A single prompt to an LLM like ChatGPT uses up the amount of electricity Commodore 64, one of the first house computers, would use in an hour of intense work. Image generation is worse. Currently, the use of generative AI consumes as much electricity as the entire country of Ireland on a yearly basis (approximately 29 TWh). As of now, IT sector is responsible to 2-4% of global emissions per year, but due to rapid growth of generative AI, it is estimated that by 2040 it will be responsible for a whooping 14%. If you have any love for the environment at all, don't use generative AI for anything unless a use-case vastly improves your quality of life (or you know the servers are in a location that uses 100% renewables/nuclear, but that's highly improbable). Yes, generative AI can be a useful tool for automating repetetive work, but it must be used responsibly. Here are some nice articles where you can start reading about this. https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.02243 https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/widm.1507 2. Academia, privatisation and equality As you've noticed from point 1, generative AI, unlike many other types of AI, uses a metric fuckton of resources. In fact, the sheer intensity of resources now required to produce paper-worthy results has made it increasingly challenging for people working in academia (and in poorer parts of the world in general) to continue contributing to research. This trend towards huge models leads us towards the future where only rich megacorporations will be able to contribute to research. It will simply not be possible for the academia to keep up with industry. Do we want that? I sure as shit don't. 3. In this house we respect artists And we all know how them generative AI companies obtained their training datasets. By scraping everyone's art, oftentimes without consent of the artists whose art they were scraping. I don't support that, and neither should you. So don't engage with the product of a business that works in such ways. 4. Just why? Isn't it the point of a fandom to express our appreciation towards the work we are losing our minds about by creating in the fandom? AI art is missing the expression. It is a work of an algorithm. A set of emotionless, unthinking mathematical equations trained to reproduce what they've seen, then adjust it slightly to comply with what was requested as needed. It is a joyless endeavour producing sterile cellophane-wrapped works completely lacking in warmth. It is counterproductive.

As a final note, I want to say not all AI is generative AI, and not all AI is bad. There are some amazing models, many of them quite low cost, that make the job of accountants, meteorologists, economists, biologists etc. a lot easier, and contribute to research in various fields. And that's great, because that's what AI was meant to be - an efficent tool that improves lives. Not just another form of entertainment in the consumerist hellscape. But capitalism said no, and here we are.

like i'm sorry but we as a fandom have to stay firm on our anti-AI values. we cannot suddenly start giving AI a pass when it's something we "want to see" like destiel kisses. it's not suddenly fine. we're not going to start using AI to make fanfic scenes come to life or audio AI to make characters "say" stuff we want to hear. you have GOT to be firm on your anti-AI stance. if you start making exceptions then suddenly anything will fly. fandom is for real art and creations made by real people. no AI fanfics. no AI art. no AI rendered "bonus" scenes. no AI audio. none of it has a place here.