Text
on one hand, nobody is entitled to ai generated art because their disability prevents them from making it, because As It Stands Now, ai models are built off stolen artwork. there is not a SINGLE (publicly available at least) ai model trained off art that was willingly given to the model by the artist, and using the current models only helps exasperate this problem
on the other hand going "well i/this famous artist was disabled and THEY figured out how to make art, so its condescending to say that some disabled people CANT make art, and if ur disabled just figure it out :)" is the kind of rhetoric that time and time again hurts disabled people wrt the "well if THEY can do it, so can YOU" false dichotomy and really should not be used to make your point
& i say this as a disabled artist who absolutely does not like ai art, ESPECIALLY used in a commercial sphere. on paper it would be a fun Fucking Around Machine (esp if there was a bot trained on consentually aquired art) but capitalism requires every last scrap of revenue be squeezed out of anything like blood from a stone so we cant just have a fun thing to have a fun thing and we have shit things like it being a threat to peoples' liveliehoods and training it to mimic dead artists. and we cant really have the fun part without feeding into the bad part. what im saying is its a shame also maybe bootstrap theory is not good
58 notes · View notes