Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dire Bare" data-source="post: 9336876" data-attributes="member: 18182">They have stated they are exploring using AI generative tools TRAINED ON THE ART CATALOG THEY ALREADY OWN. They have not stated for what purpose.One of the biggest problems of AI-generated art today are tools that are trained on art without the consent or payment of the artists. WotC already owns the art they plan to use. So, this is not a problem here.The other major issue is the use of AI-generated art in place of commissioning new art created by real people. Will they use this AI-generated art instead of hiring new artists for upcoming D&amp;D products? Unlikely, considered the FAQ we are discussing here and the pushback they have already received when artists they contracted with used AI without WotC's consent.So . . . what could they use it for? It's all speculation at this point, but my expectation is customer facing generative tools to assist DMs. What if you are a DM running a game for friends, and you want a picture of an NPC for your campaign? You can launch WotC's D&amp;D AI tool TRAINED ON ART WOTC OWNS to generate an image for you. Where is the harm in the use of AI in this case? No artwork was used without consent. No artist was replaced since most DMs don't have an art budget for their personal games.AI is not evil. AI is a tool that can be used for good or for evil. WotC has not yet shown ANY indication of using AI for evil purposes, to supplant living artists. Might they in the future? Sure, I'll worry about it at that time.You are participating in the &quot;buzzword feeding frenzy&quot; by assuming AI always equals harm.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dire Bare, post: 9336876, member: 18182"] They have stated they are exploring using AI generative tools TRAINED ON THE ART CATALOG THEY ALREADY OWN. They have not stated for what purpose. One of the biggest problems of AI-generated art today are tools that are trained on art without the consent or payment of the artists. WotC already owns the art they plan to use. So, this is not a problem here. The other major issue is the use of AI-generated art in place of commissioning new art created by real people. Will they use this AI-generated art instead of hiring new artists for upcoming D&D products? Unlikely, considered the FAQ we are discussing here and the pushback they have already received when artists they contracted with used AI without WotC's consent. So . . . what could they use it for? It's all speculation at this point, but my expectation is customer facing generative tools to assist DMs. What if you are a DM running a game for friends, and you want a picture of an NPC for your campaign? You can launch WotC's D&D AI tool TRAINED ON ART WOTC OWNS to generate an image for you. Where is the harm in the use of AI in this case? No artwork was used without consent. No artist was replaced since most DMs don't have an art budget for their personal games. AI is not evil. AI is a tool that can be used for good or for evil. WotC has not yet shown ANY indication of using AI for evil purposes, to supplant living artists. Might they in the future? Sure, I'll worry about it at that time. You are participating in the "buzzword feeding frenzy" by assuming AI always equals harm. [/QUOTE]

Verification