AI/LLMs AI art bans are going to ruin small 3rd party creators

[Maxperson]

Even if his initial prompt is a perfect descriptor of the composition and contents, the generator would almost certainly fail to deliver it in one try. But if they masked various regions out (either to alter or not alter), and meticulously calibrated all the settings of how much the changed portion could differ from what's being fed in and did iterative work; and/or then brought it into GIMP and did a paintover in some parts and put it back in and gave it refinement prompts (masking out or not masking out sections to re-render), he could eventually get there. The iterative process he described was doable before these cloud generators existed, when I tested it out on my aging GPU. That's why I assumed Maxperson was running an image generator on their own hardware. It would be impractical to do all that through cloud generating services.

I had just reasoned it out. Personally I have no interest in creating artworks in person or on a computer. The only reason I pulled it up like I did was that people were constantly telling me that it couldn't be done, so I took a few minutes to prove that it could be. The way you describe seems much better.

 

[Morrus]

The only reason I pulled it up like I did was that people were constantly telling me that it couldn't be done, so I took a few minutes to prove that it could be.

You have spent far, far more than a few minutes on these forums arguing vehemently and at length in favour of generative AI in many, many threads. Which is certainly odd for somebody who claims to have no desire to use it.

 

[Cergorach]

Yeah i would rather keep working my 40 hour a week county job until i retire and never sell a copy of my life's work than put generative ai slop in it.

A couple of things, if I make something for making something myself, I'll make it myself. Most people's life work is something personal, that they will make themselves, with no participation of others (including AI).

Harshness will now ensue:
But just because it's your life's work, does not mean it's good or something others will want. Chances are good that you will never sell a copy of your life's work with or without AI. But that's imho allright, as you're making it for yourself in the first place. That said, when you start making things to sell, for others, you need to take into consideration other factors, people, processes, and efficiency.

Example:
There are times when you're too tired and lack time, you go for instant meals, be that microwave/oven meals, instant noodles, or some fast food. Your only concerns are generally time, price, and whether it'll make you sick or not. Other times you'll take the time to make a very good meal, healthy, almost completely self made, and tasty. While other times you'll go out eating to a proper restaurant, where you don't actually check how the chef is making your meal... As long as the meal was awesome and the setting was great, you'll be happy, with no $&*% given about how they achieved that.

I see AI usage in the same light. DMing a D&D campaign is NOT my lives work. Neither is it for the people playing in that campaign. We already use the rules and often even adventures/campaigns made by others. What makes the pnp RPG experience lives between those 'walls' (or framework). And where you spend your time as a DM depends on what you want to run and how much time you have... Sometimes AI usage is great, sometimes it's not wanted. But please leave that up to the individual to decide when and where they use it or not, and respect the people's decisions even if you don't agree with it.

because courts are reliable

I'll just add the '/sarcams' myself. Courts are bound by laws, location, culture, and time, all of those change. So what one court says in one location, another court will say something else in another location due to the passage of time, different cultures and laws. And even laws change and especially how to interpret them.

I would argue that AI is being used in a LOT of places/situations where you don't expect them to be used at all, especially traditionally.

 

[Morrus]

But please leave that up to the individual to decide when and where they use it or not, and respect the people's decisions even if you don't agree with it.

But, again, that's not how ethics and morality work. Leaving others to do unethical and/or immoral things is not enough; it requires good people to speak up. Now, you can argue whether or not it's unethical (it is, but that's the other tedious conversation and not the point here) but asking that people should just ignore or, worse, respect what they consider to be unethical or immoral behaviour is probably a non-starter.

I’d say the same if the topic was piracy (which it kind of is but hey ho) or any number of other things. As it happens, we’re talking generative LLMs.

 

[aramis erak]

I'm not familiar with that one. But certainly, if you can put the logic you want cleanly onto paper, without an IDE filling in blanks for you and correcting your errors, then you understand what you've built.


I am not sure to what you're referring. Is that Punch-Card programming jokes? Or a comment about ASM instruction length limits? I may be a little too young for this one myself. lol

The tests for the class I took in Vax Basic were "Here's a chunk of code. Execute it by hand. Show all work" simple 5 function calculators were allowed, but you risked points by using them... transcription errors in longhand were marked off less than those who used calculators and made transcription errors.