BTW since posting here I have suddenly had two comments deleted for "hate speech" though it does not show what the comment is. Completely ridiculous how the net and tech industry has become.
I use ai but I want it to be my choice when I use it or don't not force it on me, I had a manuscript posted in 2 places only Google docs and on my home computer sn an ai generated the Bible for my book almost word fir word but was enough I correct my grammar.
AI was the first technology that made me feel like I'm living in the future. To say that I was impressed, would be an understatement. But after the initial excitement faded, it was quickly replaced by boredom and disappointment. Most AI art looks like it was made by the same person, and I've yet to see a single project that makes good use of it. On top of that, it's stealing jobs from actual artists. I can see why some people would hate it.
I'm sick of hearing about it and I'm largely a proponent of it. The marketing for it is particularly cringeworthy and creepy, and I can only think that is intentional, because most of the players want centralized AI surrounded by state bureaucracy
Still waiting for a full week in which I hear NOTHING about AI (that is, no mainstream news about AI or mainstream people having takes on AI). I don't think it will happen in 2024 :(
This AI trend is so stupid. Every company that is into AI appears to put it as their top priority. It's so bad that if you look at the advertising for the newest Google or Samsung phones, it only mentions AI and nothing else. Nothing about the phones they're selling, just the fact that their software has AI features. At this point, "AI" is an anti-feature for me. If I see "AI" being advertised for a product, I avoid that product.
*XNU developer opinion discarded* All mobile applications are trash, "pro" Apple products sell less than consumer graphics cards, their target audience is that of the tech illiterate, and they only exist in an ecosystem of who can farm appstore SEO the hardest. Let's say they were developing a legitmately good product, they wouldn't be branded as "that apple software vendor," nor would they be yelling at a related target audience over how evil they are. All that mucho texto, yea, that's all code for "pls buy our product" written by an English major. I'm so glad a bitmaps graphics application, *checks notes*, allows me to maintain ownership of what I doodle. I love it even more when they virtue signal over what is and isnt allowed in or around their service. 👏 👏i support for 👏current 👏 thing 👏👏 BUY 👏OUR 👏PRODUCT 👏👏👏
And it's a wonderful feature that I use on occasion when not writing code which I've bound to s and S to turn it on and off respectively. However, what did Lunduke spell incorrectly in this video? Is it a title which was likely changed since the video was posted or is there something else I may have missed?
I'd agree with almost everything except for the chance that ai could be used to create new MilkDrop2 visuals for Winamp 5.56, which is still my main music library program😂
@@82andymac If it looked right when run through WINE I'd totally be using that as well. At least that is assuming that it would obey the media keys. I use Audacious right now because it's one of the few that has all the options similar to WinAMP but also obeys the media keys. It doesn't look too bad either.
Could be wrong, but I think A.I. is a major hit on the egos of artist designers out there and can make them not want to pursue endeavors at all. The idea that artists will just be cleanup garbage men on projects generated by A.I. is pretty frustrating to people, to the point of nihilism I think. I could be wrong. Maybe a lot of them are more excited. But I could see it being a mindset problem that won't easily be resolved.
I don't know. The theory tickles my innate cynicism and acquired misanthropy, but the only way in which I would feel personally threatened is the likelihood of my work being devalued if generative AI could produce something which satisfies the customer faster, cheaper and subjectively better. Bluntly, the people who would be employed to do AI cleanup would not be artists. I am personally excited by many possibilities of AI tools, and while I would sacrifice that for a healthy society, I don't think a healthy society is in the cards either way, and I don't think the cat is going back in the bag.
A lot of people are be discouraged to learn skills like art and programming due to AI. This is going to create a skill shortage and AI will stagnate as it won't have any new human output to leach from.
@@amex02 As long as we're writing speculative fiction, then I would add: "Around which point the demand for original material will skyrocket, sparking a renaissance." Creativity wasn't _created_ by corporations, and it won't disappear just because corporations stop funding it. Rather, corporations who do not adapt will fail as their products stagnate. A skill shortage you say? That is another way of saying less supply vs. demand, and higher value.
I'm not very confident in the "artists to cleanup AI output" prediction. I've experimented a lot with image generators, and there's a strong trend that they'll perform really well on some classes of images, and then fail hopelessly on slightly different classes of images, every single time. Fail so badly that it would take a capable artist less time to redraw the whole scene from scratch than it would take them to clean up the mess. There's just too many times where the AI fundamentally fails to understand the scene, so even feeding it a sketch as input isn't enough. There's many such cases when you can't really trust the poor AI to do anything beyond surface level polish. In general, the less generic a thing you ask for, the worse these AI perform, and the quality decline can be sharp and unintuitive unless you have a lot of experience with a given model family. Basically, in the foreseeable future we'll need capable artist to do real artist things to create anything that isn't overly samey. Image generators can still be very useful for accelerating the tedious work, but they're not something you can rely on as primary "artists". I think it will be similar to how many manga artists sneakily use 3D models for reoccurring background elements, (building interiors and such,) while hand drawing characters and more dynamic foreground elements, and then using a combination of digital image filtering and hand tracing to blend it all into a coherent style. The whole point is to accelerate the most tedious work and spend most of their time drawing the things the readers care the most about. Or how many skilled programmers find AI tools useful for quickly filling in generic boiler plate code and simple self explanatory stuff, but software of any meaningful complexity still has to be designed by hand. Because those that lean too heavily on the AI to fill in stuff they themselves don't understand quickly end up creating a tangled unmaintainable mess. Off course there are a lot of corpo illustration work which is frightfully generic and cost sensitive. I do see Generative AI gobbling up a big chunk of that market, if it hasn't already. it plays to all their existing strengths. But then again, I struggle to think of that kind of work as "art" due to how formulaic it tends to be. Smart AI use means less frantic typing and more thinking. Less drawing on autopilot and more creativity. Off course this could change if there's some revolutionary advancement which makes these models way better at grasping the big picture and understanding what they're doing, but these things are hard to predict. Personally I don't see it happening by the end of the decade, but I don't have much to base that off of beyond the assumption that major advancements in training will likely require a fundamentally different approach than before. Current techniques are too data hungry in training, and there just aren't enough untapped sources of high quality data left on the internet. At least I don't think there is, seeing how desperate these companies are when fighting for every last scrap of human made data.
I have no issue with AI. There is of course the prospect of the internet turning into an AI circle jerk. But in general, AI is just another tool. I mean, why use tools like Procreate then? Why not do it by hand with real physical colours and materials? Where is the qualitative difference between splicing together some stock photos and some fancy brushes, some layer effects and some masking compared to telling Midjourney or Photoshop to generate the image for you? Both are heavily software dependent and have nothing to do with anything real. Software should empower people and AI can do just that. For example, Harvey Pekar only had a career as a comic book writer because he knew Robert Crumb. He had great ideas, but couldn't draw. Unfortunately, most people in a similar situation are not friends with Robert Crumb, so their ideas remain forever hidden away in their own minds. But with generative AI, some day soon they may be able to publish their stories anyway. Why should that be a problem? And why is photography not a problem? No human was involved in creating the photo. Wouldn't it be more authentic art if one would actually paint the image? Technology by and large can democratise art. Typesetting a book was a complex task, somebody would have to study and practice for years to become proficient. Today, everybody can do it, thanks to software, no human specialist being involved. Software spellcheckers have reduced the typos without any human spellchecker being involved. What's the problem then if ChatGPT becomes so good one day, so that you don't need a human editor but you can have ChatGPT edit your book? Edit: One problematic point (apart from the circle jerk) is of course the fact that companies now try to get the rights to using other people's work. Now, I'm okay with AI being trained on published work, just like any human artist is trained on published work. Kafka wouldn't have written the way he did had he not read Dostoevsky. But private stuff has to remain private, which includes workflows and processes artists use. I would not use any software which sniffs out my private files or how I use my apps. In fact, that should be illegal. If companies want to have that kind of information, they should pay for it, hire artists who can train their AIs.
Yep. This is the take. I feel like there are obviously some legally-relevant aspects of the usage of the technology but I don't see any reason why those cannot be reasonably addressed and still recognize that the technology isn't inherently bad and it's just a tool, like everything else.
People want the product, they do not care how it is made or generated. You can get milk from the Amish or pay 1/5 the price and get milk from the store. I hope I am wrong and it is like Tibetan monks making a sand mandala, it isnt the same seeing a mandala made by a machine in seconds I guess only time will tell.
This isn't accurate. It predicts. Regurgitation is generally rare, but in cases where it occurs its because the prompt leads to a prediction that can only go so many directions based on the training data. It's also reductive and silly, because I can't tell you how many times humans have said banal phrases like the one above. Are you nothing but a regurgitator yourself? Truthfully, all of us are, to one degree or another. Ecclesiastes 1:9
Basically, if anything you're doing is being replaced by AI, whatever you were doing wasn't great to begin with. Folks, don't get your jobs taken by something that predicts humans have eight fingers on their hand normally
I'm not a fan of it, but Pandora's box has been open and using it as a tool and not a crutch is what we need to figure out. Until it can generate a picture with the right anatomy fingers and toes, I'll take it with a grain of salt right now. It's something that needs to be watched, understood and monitored. If not, you are just going to get ran over by it.
I don't agree with you on this front Bryan but then I also enjoy watching videos of blacksmiths making horseshoes and guys building shelters out of sticks.
I hate AI art as well, but... Their are genuine applications for AI in art. AI powered up-scaling would be a useful tool, for animation, generating in-between frames would be helpful to have integrated in the software, and detecting the edges you probably want when using the fill tool could also be very helpful. Two of those exist in separate programs, but integration would make the application of those features quicker and easier. There are a lot of tedious things that don't really add to the "humanity" of a piece, and those may be accelerated/benefited with the use of a local AI. It would be a nice feature set for the people who have AI compatible hardware.
@@JodyBruchonThat’s just the corporate flavor of the week. The real stuff you run locally can relight scenes as if the actual product or model was in a completely different environment with perfect light and shadow and texture. You can take an image of a bottle of wine on a white background and make it look like the picture is a bottle of wine sitting in a sunny vineyard. The real models are not magic buttons, it’s not one single tool or step. It’s more like a suite of individual algorithms that combine to form a photoshop like collection of free tools. The “all in one” press a magic button gimmicks are just there to milk subscription fees from plebs.
Okay it all sounds good but if it isnt open source at the end of the day the terms and conditions could change tomorrow. It sounds like he is saying all the right things but what if he sells the business and someone else takes over? Ultimately proprietary means you cannot trust it.
This is awesome. I have Procreate and an iPad. I’m not too thrilled about some things about this iPad but now it might rekindlemy love for creating digital art. Thank you for sharing a little positivity today.
It's not mentioned in this video, but I would like to add that Gentoo is also blocking AI made or AI helped contributions. Though they reserved the ability to have exceptions, just in case. But this isn't because of creativity and stuff like that, it's just about the ethics, moraly and licensing part of it. They just don't want to have to deal with a potential giant mess later. And I couldn't agree more on that stance.
artists are super anti ai. I think the problem with AI is that peoples behaviour is generally bot like to begin with. You don't need AI you can do the same thing with unthinking underpaid interns
All these people that cry and rage about AI are just butthurt artists that only use art as a means to get easy money. They don't really like art itself, because if they did, they wouldn't care, no one is going to stop them from creating art as a hobby. But as a profession, it must, and will go down. I don't have to pay $40-70 just for a single character concept art anymore that will take hours if not days after having to communicate with an entitled human, and no one else should. I have generated more than 100 characters for the TTRGP campaign I run, I created a few songs and music, and elevated my lore with writing I could never pull off on my own, and my players love everything (and they don't care about AI generated content as long as they have fun).
I keep seeing this argument that AI is to Art what Cars are to horses. The thing is I have seen a horse and I have seen a car- they are not the same thing, they are entirely different things. So can we agree that AI Art is not the same thing as Human made Art? AI Art is it's own thing, with it's own qualities and it's own limitations. I also keep seeing video's that breathlessly announce that yet another brand new AI Art Generator has just been released and that it's 'the Midjourney killer' or whatever. But when I look at the sample galleries of these new AI's they look oddly similar to the sample galleries of the old AI's- it's as if all the AI Art generators were somehow distant relations that share a similar genetic inheritance. The thing is that AI Art looks like AI Art- even when different styles are used to generate the image- it's something about the framing, the composition, the use of color and light- the absence of strong narrative or storytelling in the image. Scrolling through an AI Art gallery is like drowning in Chocolate Fudge Sundae- sure it's confectious and superficially appealing but too much of it leads to a nauseous sensation of overwhelming sweetness and creates a longing for something more intellectualy and artistically challenging and meaningful.
I use generative AI for hobby art. In my book, I'd rather spend 5 minutes waiting on AI than spend 5 hours drawing a rough outline, refining it, and iterating on shading. And I certainly don't want to pay what artists *should* be asking as a commission for the same. Do I prefer it when humans do it? Absolutely. I still draw for my own amusement sometimes. But AI is just another tool in the proverbial kit. Not something we need to bring out the torches and pitchforks for.
And yet, I anticipate the torches and pitchforks nevertheless. I predict that people are going to agitate until the only ones permitted legally to use AI are mega-corporations and three-letter-agencies. Politicians will gleefully milk fear of AI to drive reelection campaigns, and bureaucracies and legal firms will thrive on a whole new frontier absolutely festooned in red tape. I hope I'm wrong.
Yeah. It just bothers me when the tech is used in bad faith. Like flooding art sites with unlabelled low-effort AI puke that can't easily be filtered out. Or mass producing no-effort regurgitated clickbait articles far faster than online "journalists" of old. That's just shitting up the Internet for easy clout and a quick buck. And then there's the general trend of AI being shoehorned into all kinds of applications very prematurely, since every tech company now apparently HAS to be an AI company, regardless if it fits their use case. The real progress is impressive, but the hype just got way overblown. My friend often uses generated artwork as illustrations for his D&D campaign, since it's a quick way to add a little extra flavour to our sessions and set the atmosphere. Another friend got Chat GPT to help clean up his ugly writing for his master's thesis. I myself have had a lot of fun playing with open weight image and text generators. I find it very entertaining to explore what they are capable of. Any useful tool has potential for abuse. It's just that in this case the abuse is REALLY freaking annoying since a few bad actors can crank out an overwhelming volume of slop with little consequence to themselves.
Affinity also claimed they will never go into subscription model. Now Canva acquired them and it's only matter of time when it's gonna happen. I think only a fully open source tool can compete against Adobe.
I actually emailed Notion this week to request that they remove all the AI from my workspaces (which they will do, but you need to request it). Why the hell would I need it on a note taking app?
AI is vomiting what it has been told to digest; and not what it has not been told to digest. Tell it that people are not people, and it will soon become a *beep* nazAI. Was it M$ or Twitter that already did it and had to pull the plug almost immediately ? And the tech may be better than 10 years ago, or 30 years ago when I had some interest in it. But not much. The hype has been initiated by some jumps in computing power and data volumes that this computing power has access to. No revolution in this. And would AI be good at anything, who else think that it would be cheating? As a coder, I would not feel confident to deliver code I have not written myself. Let alone the security concern I read about. I recently made few test, while looking for help about STM32 + LwIP. No useful result and I had to correct ChatGPT. Also, a friend of mine had a chat about cow eggs. Read again. By the way, I don't know Procrate, but I think I would prefer Procrastinate !
AI is the future in every field, and nothing will stop it. Anyone that will not use AI in the next few years will not be competitive. Artists can be as butthurt as they want, and they can keep using their bs arguments that have no relation to reality, but things will not change. But you are free to keep providing us with entertainment with your reactions and reasoning that is close to flat earther levels.
Hey Bryan, I followed you for years, then stopped when you left UA-cam. I rarely listened your podcasts on Spotify, but this format I really enjoy, keep going! ☺
A big Bravo Zulu to the folks at Procreate! My daughter is an aspiring artist. I might have to get her an iPad (and I never thought I would say that, like, EV-ER!) Thanks for the coverage, Bryan.
Somehow as a society, sooo many people are opposed to artificial anything - artificial sweeteners, artificial colors, artificial fabrics, artificial leather, artificial wood, artificial light, and so on and so forth. Artificial Intelligence should be at the top of that list.
Spellcheck is “ai”, digital cameras use “ai” to pull focus, a search engine uses “ai” to serve you results. Digital = algorithms and all ai is, is math.
@@ghost-user559 You're not wrong. But just because everything a computer does is math doesn't make something "AI". Partly it's just the latest hot buzzword that makes investors throw money at something. But also I think the dangerous (or at least worthy of suspicion) thing is the current crop of AI tools are claimed by their creators to be black boxes. Whether you're talking about large language models, image generators, neural networks, etc. something aspect of their output is not open. Maybe some of the code is open source, but the model won't be. Or if the model is inspectable, but the training data is considered proprietary. Ultimately their purveyors are happy to sell you the results, but they're not going to claim responsibility for them when they go wrong.
@@rhekman The Gpu is a black box. So is the cpu. Capable of anything a human chooses to do with them. All our hardware runs algorithms inside of proprietary “black boxes”. You are correct that this is just the latest buzzword, but it’s very effective. Buzzwords are used to create irrational behavior, and that can be positive reactions or negative reactions. Did you know that they were calling all computer algorithms Ai in the 50s and 60s? I watched a documentary from that time where they talked about these massive computers with a bunch of vacuum tubes before we even had transistors lol, and they were opining the “future of ai”. Can probably find it on here. The point is “generative ai” is math. It’s a math equation just like all the others. I would call it “idolatry” actually. It’s literally the attempted deification of basic mathematical equations. We don’t fear algebraic equations on a piece of paper, they do nothing without a human. Suddenly inside a computer that math is “scary” and “alive”. I played with the magic 8 ball as a kid, but I knew it wasn’t actually responding to me. Pythagoras was a cult leader who convinced thousands to worship shapes and math equations. Some things never change. It’s just full circle really.
Seriously artist not using FOSS and believing they are "free" from something "evil", the true libre artist is the one who don't need closed source software to make Art.
Generative AI is definitely not creativity. It is copyright theft. Prompts are the only creativity involved, the LLM does everything else. That does not make you an artist.
I think AI will become the industrial future of design and illustration, but like with artisans and tailors, human made art will continue to exist for a niche public, mostly the rich, who crave exclusivity.
The only thing generative AI is good for IMO is for quickly whipping up images of hypothetical situations for memes on twitter where spending any amount of time actually making the image manually would take too long, and the level of creativity doesn’t matter. Writing and making actual art with AI is dumb and anyone who says “crafting the perfect prompt is so hard waaahh” can stuff it.
Why would I pay 800 dollars plus a couple hundred extra for a very small number of iterations, for a book cover which is in no way objectively better, when I can fully realize my exact vision with unlimited iterations and as many stylistic changes with Ai locally for free? Why would I pay for an album cover, for an album I don’t get paid to release, when I can make my own with ai for free?
Not that you'll read this, especially on a 10 day old video, but the thing I most object to is calling it AI. All of these NN-based learning models are incorrectly formed attempts at duplicating human minds, something that isn't currently within the technological capability of humans yet, if ever. I say incorrectly formed because that's not really how human minds work. I also vehemently dislike the hype train behind "AI", but I think artists need to chill out and get over it. Yeah, the technology basically just regurgitates what others have done before, and anyone that claims otherwise doesn't actually understand how the programs work. It's a bit like mad libs with significantly many more inputs and outputs and a lot more fine-grained control over how they interact, even the art generator programs. I doubt that there's much new art to be had in this day and age, but if there is, human artists with actual skills can still compete if they learn how licensing works. If you can't create something new and unique, then are you any better than the generative programs anyway. All that said, the only places I think "AI" programs should be banned are in automation systems for censorship and in writing programs. The former should be obvious as to why, but the latter is because a human still needs to check the correctness of that generated program and if it ever goes into a piece of software that manages real life machinery which can lead to a person's death, it will guaranteed cause someone to die.
I wonder how sure the Procreate guy is that NONE of the software developers that work for him use AI to help with their coding? 90% sure? 95% sure? 😊 And if you're reading this and thinking "but code isn't art", then you think about code the way many people think about illustrators.
I’m not a huge fan of AI, but it feels like swimming upstream against the current trend. Everybody: We are moving to cars. Procreate: We’ll stick with horses.
I have an iPad, and honestly, I love the thing, it has made laptops unnecessary in my house for the most part. I also have procreate, it's an amazing piece of software, and it's kind of refreshing to see software for which you own a license. I'm not an artist, but damn if I feel like supporting those guys.
@@JodyBruchon I have a $2k desktop, I've had laptops and hate them with a passion, the iPad is the best solution for my needs, battery last twice than my last laptop, the touch screen actually works, the trackpad is fantastic, the apple pencil is great, and it weighs a third of what my gaming laptop did. The compromises are minimal. Sure, the experience isn't 1:1 to what a pc is but it's a far better device than a laptop for my taste. It's certainly better for productivity than my S24 ultra with it's gimmicky samsung dex and useless s pen. So, instead of being a hater of a device because it has an apple logo on the back, I decided to appreciate what it brings to the table, I like my iPhone as much as I like my Samsung phone, and I appreciate Windows strenghts in gaming while I embrace the tranquility that Fedora's superior privacy brings to the table. Only morons waste their time being haters.
@@JodyBruchonSome iPads have more compute power than a lot of desktop computers now lol. The issue is just that they don’t have very much access to software. I’m not sure if that says something about the sorry state of x86 hardware, the state of windows, Intel or all of the above. But regardless the “toys” are now more powerful and higher quality than many “real computers”. But due to the walled garden this is still obviously not a win.
@@JodyBruchon Well single threaded the M2 pro, which is several models old at this point got 3,914, and the Ryzen got 3,904. On Geekbench the M4 gets 3665 and the Ryzen gets 2617, the multicore is 13292 for the m4, and the Ryzen gets 12447, on ai tasks the TOPS of the M4 Npu is 38, and the Ryzen get 10. The iPad Pro doesn’t run handbrake so thats pretty much irrelevant. A tablet versus a laptop is already a difficult comparison without trying to compare software that isn’t on both platforms, but for a tablet to have a chip that performs better than your cpu by multiple metrics, even the M2 which is two iterations ago, is pretty interesting.
Traditional artists talked this way about digital art not too long ago and illustrators who forego new tools will find themselves very quickly undercut
@@karishaffer irrelevant, this isn't about 'skill', it's about productivity. people said all the same stuff, that if you draw on a wacom you aren't an artist, blah blah blah. if you want to stay relevant as a working commercial artist you need to learn to use these tools and if you don't the people who do will eat your lunch
The former does nothing but finance more government bureaucracy which produces nothing of value. And the latter is a big mistake in my view, because it would reserve the benefits of AI to select groups of people while not limiting the harm it can cause whatsoever. In fact it's more likely to cause harm because the best defense against AI is other AI, e.g. scanning media to detect AI generation. Governments should not be trusted with the power to regulate anything beyond the defense of rights.
@@pgtmr2713 You have no idea what the future holds, and you are only speculating that 'doing nothing won't work.' Taking irrevocable action when you don't know what to do may make you feel better in the short term but it is not a solution. Taking action when it would predictably create more problems _and_ would likely not solve the original problem is irrational.
@@rath6375 However could we possibly predict... human behavior? Have you seen that AI pic of Trump holding Kamala's pregnant belly? Regardless of where you are on ANY issue, we can all agree that while hilarious, it was stomach churning. It is already being used without any warning. So it's not a future thing, it is happening right now. How about using AI to cheat on college papers? Is that not a fraud. Potential propaganda uses by government? No thank you. I don't believe it should be used to replace people in jobs either. That will encourage people that think they're better, to oopsie several billion people out of existence, to solve the problem of people complaining about "issues." Very big problems with AI, and it's only just beginning. Government bureaucracy sucks, I'll give you that. But we can't rationalize it to doing nothing.
Does photoshop? Does digital music, which nowadays consists of zero real musicians playing zero real instruments? Does digital art? Does digital photography require this?
😮 I like to be on The winning side of any conflict😮 remember that battle where one side didn't use gunpowder because it was unethical😮 we are the Borg😮 existence as you know it is over😮 lower your Shields and defensive systems hand over your data and your art😮 your cultural and biological distinctiveness will be made to serve the larger hole😮 resistance is futile😮 did your ancestors resist fire do you resist Wi-Fi do you resist your TV😮 do you resist air conditioning😮 do you resist your car😮 stop this feudal nonsense😮 now you're going to say AI isn't human😮 so we agree that our brains are human and have souls😮 do you know about the brain organoid computer we're making AI right now out of😮 brain cells😮 we can take skin cells and stem cells electrify them and turn them into brain cells and grow them artificially😮 we're already at the point where you can rent servers face on one of these😮 and we've connected up to 16 organoids to each other😮 we've made rat human brain hybrid chimeras😮 and surgically removed the brain to grow more and then used it for basic data analysis😮 the scientific papers are all right there just literally Google organoid computer😮 resistance is futile what's done is done😮 and it cannot be undone😮
I belive all this AI bros hate artists. They love the pretty images but they don't respect the people who do it. So they want a machine to emulate them so they can have pretty images without paying or respecting any artists. I don't have respect Ai bros that support ai gens.
AI is for the rest of us.. the indie hackers who just need some quick generative something or other because we either don't have the time to do it ourselves, the talent to do it ourselves, or the money to hire professionals to do it for us.
About subscriptions on software…. As much as I hate adobe to the core, I can’t help but think software with one time payment is unsustainable. How can procreate company pay for new features released every year, which are given to customers for free? Also software maintenance is a separate work unto itself, how can procreate pay for it? Not to mention the App Store hosting fee which is recurring by Apple.
@@ghost-user559 back then software was developed extremely slowly, and it was nowhere close to today’s complexity. Today’s teenagers can write software of the 80s😂
@@asishreddy7729 Haha even today’s computers can write the software of the 80s, code llama and copilot and such. It an even write most code of the 90s and 2000’s. But still. Even then it’s only due to the “update for cash” culture that leads to an unrealistic dev cycle. I know of many incredible apps that are one time payments and are around 300$. Instead of milking their customers they *gasp* get more customers. Most people want the best they can get, and if you provide that, they would rather pay 500 to own than 50$ a year to never own. At least among “professional software” and the upper hobbyists thats the reality. Adobe was literally founded on this concept, as were most of the “big” software companies today. This myth that subscribing to a perpetually unfinished product is somehow better than delivering a complete product which has actual perpetual value was started by marketing departments lol.
@@asishreddy7729 Haha even today’s computers can write the software of the 80s, code llama and copilot and such. It an even write most code of the 90s and 2000’s. But still. Even then it’s only due to the “update for cash” culture that leads to an unrealistic dev cycle. I know of many incredible apps that are one time payments and are around 300-500. Instead of milking their customers they ,gasp, get more customers. Most people want the best they can get, and if you provide that, they would rather pay 500 to own than 50$ a year to never own. At least among “professional software” and the upper hobbyists thats the reality. Adobe was literally founded on this concept, as were most of the “big” software companies today. This myth that subscribing to a perpetually unfinished product is somehow better than delivering a complete product which has actual perpetual value was started by marketing departments lol.
Sorry, but they didn't' say "no ML", they said "no Generative AI" ( which is just generative ML really, we don't have ANY AI anywhere ). Quick example of the difference : A model that takes a n layered image and outputs a perfect blend. It's not "Generative AI" in the sense we perceive it, even though it actually generates something. And anyone doing compositing would give their first born for it. Perfect blends without tedious hours of masking, feathering and whatnot? They'd jump on that wagon before you could blink. Anyway, who cares? They don't, someone else will. Because the end user doesn't give two f's about the creators or the tools, they care about the end product. If consumers cared, we wouldn't have sweatshops competing to churn out for the lowest cost they can. And look back a bit. Photography vs portrait painters? Motor vehicles vs coach drivers? Etc... Point in case, when your replacement comes, you go, always been, always will, it's not a new thing, it's a human thing.
I think AI is great for generation of art and could be great in some cases for voice. For example in some game dev stuff I've done I make several animations and characters and blend them together in various ways. This is technically AI and that's all these art generations really do. Most art is already garbage that copies other people or is digitized from real images anyway. But this will always look like garbage compared to what even I can do let alone a real artist. The point where it is scary and dangerous is they want to push AI onto you for your taxes, for computer settings, stuff like that. That is what this is really about and what has to be stopped. That is why I am (trying anyway) to move to linux, though my new motherboard or 8400f CPU does not want to do this.
The CPU certainly isn't the problem for moving to Linux. On the AI part, you could say that if you tell it to generate things that you imagined, it's still you doing the creation, and the AI is just (like a tool) facilitating, helping you transpose your imagination. The counterpoint is that many people aren't and won't do that.
@@Winnetou17 The CPU can cause problems in linux if it is newer. It is not high end but my concern is that it is newer and I specifically wanted a CPU with no GPU built in. It seems like it fails in the video but that makes zero sense because an rx6600 should be fine on any new linux. I also tried install with an old nvidia 260 but got problems there, too. I can install debian OK but when I log in I get some errors about amdgpu cannot init then it never goes into the desktop. I installed without the desktop and I was actually able to log in and everything was working. I thought it may be USB or WIFI issues, but I was able to install from USB and boot without desktop. I'm also able to get updates from the mirror using the non WIFI connector direct to the modem. So I am not sure what else it can really be. I'm going to set them up side by side so I can try things will looking stuff up on the web at the same time and maybe then I will finally make some progress. Or I may have to wait for the CPU to get supported if that is the issue. It was only released in april so could have an issue. That or the B650E chipset but I would think they'd support that by now.
@@LTPottenger Interesting. I still say that it's not the CPU lacking support, unless it somehow belives it has an iGPU when it doesn't. From what you say, it seems it's confused somehow about the GPU. I can't give any actual advice, since I've never tried that combo, I'm still on an almost 8 year old laptop with Intel 6th gen CPU and an NVidia 1060 GPU. I installed Gentoo and I can't say I had any major issues or problems, though I think I had to install the nvidia proprietary drivers twice initially or something. I actually had more issues with the Wi-Fi card until I got it working. Booting from live USB works ? Including multiple distros ? That would be a sign that it's not processor support. Unless, don't know, maybe you installed Debian and the kernel version doesn't know about Ryzen 8000, that might be a thing. But almost all other distros have a newer kernel which should instantly solve the problem. Or maybe you can upgrade the kernel in Debian too, though I don't know how easy that is.
@@Winnetou17 debian was the only one that would go live the others all hang. There's a lot of things yet to try but I have to set it up to do it while I have web access or it is just too slow going one by one. Thanks for the input though!
I use AI to make a game. For graphics, music, animations, coding. A while ago this would take a decade for me to learn to create, or capital to spend on artists. I know those who do creative work for a living don't like it, but I love AI.
AI generated content is the future of social media posts and business infographics. Whether the Procreate creator likes it or not, if an app offers similar functionality to pro-create, but with additional AI features, they will be blown out of the water in no time 🤷♂
AI is really not much different from CGI or any other digital tools that ease the labor and tedium of creating art. If people are against all digitally assisted artwork, I can understand that, but the selective outrage is rather petty. I can even support being specifically opposed to low quality AI, as I am, and that's perfectly reasonable. That said, I appreciate good quality art regardless of the tools used to create it. When AI is properly leveraged to its full capacity as a creative tool in conjunction with existing digital art techniques and workflows, it is as capable as any other tool but with an obscene productivity advantage. It's easy to trade off that advantage for quality, which is where the problem arises, but in the hands of a skilled and dedicated artist it can rival or even transcend the output of any other digital creative tool.
@@maelstrom2313and how can they rival AI generated art when AI generated the art in 1 sec whereas for real artists achieving the same result will take weeks or months. After that someone like you (quoting you: for me it doesn't matter how the art was created) says that they are only willing to pay 0.5 dollars for that piece of art because they can get similar piece of AI generated art for that price. Where exactly does the money come for that artist/painter or whatever? You simply have to get a haircut and a real job in McDonald's because if your monthly salary will be 2 dollars you will be non existent at some time as you end up eating your own body parts for lunch on the street.
That makes no sense at all. There is nothing even essential about A.I. It goes away completely, life goes on as it has been and evolves in different ways.
@@michaelbuddy maybe try to learn what AI can really do, and all the major benefits the entirety of humanity will have as AI advances more in the next few years. It's like saying, we would be fine if we have no electricity, we can still survive.
BTW since posting here I have suddenly had two comments deleted for "hate speech" though it does not show what the comment is. Completely ridiculous how the net and tech industry has become.
Strange. I'm outright demonic and I never had such problems.
The system is definitely broken, or just not fit for purpose at all.
Welcome to the club. Have a drink. Enjoy the good company. 😁
Yeah, there are some pussy willows in the comments section
AI sucks. I hate AI being inserted everywhere. AI fridges, AI toilets, AI post stamps. It's absolutely crazy how far it is going.
gotta farm that data
AI pregnancy tests.
AI kids.
But how will manufacturers compel people to buy the newest product they don't actually need if they don't tack the latest buzzword onto it?
I use ai but I want it to be my choice when I use it or don't not force it on me, I had a manuscript posted in 2 places only Google docs and on my home computer sn an ai generated the Bible for my book almost word fir word but was enough I correct my grammar.
Just seems like a *CURRENT YEAR* advertising flex against Adobe. The proof will be in the pudding as to who has more industry use.
I think the writing is already on the wall regarding that, if you've been reading the news.
If it is a marketing ploy, it's a smart one.
AI was the first technology that made me feel like I'm living in the future. To say that I was impressed, would be an understatement. But after the initial excitement faded, it was quickly replaced by boredom and disappointment. Most AI art looks like it was made by the same person, and I've yet to see a single project that makes good use of it. On top of that, it's stealing jobs from actual artists. I can see why some people would hate it.
"The design is very human"
~ AI, probably
I think that AI is just the jank the internet has needed since GeoCities shut down.
Who else is sick of hearing about "AI"
I'm sick of hearing about it and I'm largely a proponent of it. The marketing for it is particularly cringeworthy and creepy, and I can only think that is intentional, because most of the players want centralized AI surrounded by state bureaucracy
Luddite
I'm sick of hearing people whine about it.
It's like the new version of TDS.
Me
Still waiting for a full week in which I hear NOTHING about AI (that is, no mainstream news about AI or mainstream people having takes on AI). I don't think it will happen in 2024 :(
This AI trend is so stupid. Every company that is into AI appears to put it as their top priority.
It's so bad that if you look at the advertising for the newest Google or Samsung phones, it only mentions AI and nothing else. Nothing about the phones they're selling, just the fact that their software has AI features.
At this point, "AI" is an anti-feature for me. If I see "AI" being advertised for a product, I avoid that product.
*XNU developer opinion discarded*
All mobile applications are trash, "pro" Apple products sell less than consumer graphics cards, their target audience is that of the tech illiterate, and they only exist in an ecosystem of who can farm appstore SEO the hardest. Let's say they were developing a legitmately good product, they wouldn't be branded as "that apple software vendor," nor would they be yelling at a related target audience over how evil they are. All that mucho texto, yea, that's all code for "pls buy our product" written by an English major. I'm so glad a bitmaps graphics application, *checks notes*, allows me to maintain ownership of what I doodle. I love it even more when they virtue signal over what is and isnt allowed in or around their service.
👏 👏i support for 👏current 👏 thing 👏👏 BUY 👏OUR 👏PRODUCT 👏👏👏
Lunduke , it's okay to use spell check. It's even built into vim.
And it's a wonderful feature that I use on occasion when not writing code which I've bound to s and S to turn it on and off respectively. However, what did Lunduke spell incorrectly in this video? Is it a title which was likely changed since the video was posted or is there something else I may have missed?
@@anon_y_mousse No , he just said that he doesn't even use spell check.
@@DevanandPA-vq1yj I must've missed that, but that's not so bad as long as you are good at spelling.
I'd agree with almost everything except for the chance that ai could be used to create new MilkDrop2 visuals for Winamp 5.56, which is still my main music library program😂
Based and llama-pilled!
You take the blue pill, wake up and believe whatever you want to believe.
You take the red pill and see how groovy these llama moves go.....
@@82andymac If it looked right when run through WINE I'd totally be using that as well. At least that is assuming that it would obey the media keys. I use Audacious right now because it's one of the few that has all the options similar to WinAMP but also obeys the media keys. It doesn't look too bad either.
I find it funny that the guy speaking out against generative AI is named James Cuda.
S.M.A.R.T. Phones have already made us stupider.
Could be wrong, but I think A.I. is a major hit on the egos of artist designers out there and can make them not want to pursue endeavors at all. The idea that artists will just be cleanup garbage men on projects generated by A.I. is pretty frustrating to people, to the point of nihilism I think. I could be wrong. Maybe a lot of them are more excited. But I could see it being a mindset problem that won't easily be resolved.
I don't know. The theory tickles my innate cynicism and acquired misanthropy, but the only way in which I would feel personally threatened is the likelihood of my work being devalued if generative AI could produce something which satisfies the customer faster, cheaper and subjectively better. Bluntly, the people who would be employed to do AI cleanup would not be artists. I am personally excited by many possibilities of AI tools, and while I would sacrifice that for a healthy society, I don't think a healthy society is in the cards either way, and I don't think the cat is going back in the bag.
A lot of people are be discouraged to learn skills like art and programming due to AI. This is going to create a skill shortage and AI will stagnate as it won't have any new human output to leach from.
@@amex02 As long as we're writing speculative fiction, then I would add: "Around which point the demand for original material will skyrocket, sparking a renaissance." Creativity wasn't _created_ by corporations, and it won't disappear just because corporations stop funding it. Rather, corporations who do not adapt will fail as their products stagnate. A skill shortage you say? That is another way of saying less supply vs. demand, and higher value.
the same with coders
I'm not very confident in the "artists to cleanup AI output" prediction. I've experimented a lot with image generators, and there's a strong trend that they'll perform really well on some classes of images, and then fail hopelessly on slightly different classes of images, every single time. Fail so badly that it would take a capable artist less time to redraw the whole scene from scratch than it would take them to clean up the mess. There's just too many times where the AI fundamentally fails to understand the scene, so even feeding it a sketch as input isn't enough. There's many such cases when you can't really trust the poor AI to do anything beyond surface level polish.
In general, the less generic a thing you ask for, the worse these AI perform, and the quality decline can be sharp and unintuitive unless you have a lot of experience with a given model family. Basically, in the foreseeable future we'll need capable artist to do real artist things to create anything that isn't overly samey. Image generators can still be very useful for accelerating the tedious work, but they're not something you can rely on as primary "artists".
I think it will be similar to how many manga artists sneakily use 3D models for reoccurring background elements, (building interiors and such,) while hand drawing characters and more dynamic foreground elements, and then using a combination of digital image filtering and hand tracing to blend it all into a coherent style. The whole point is to accelerate the most tedious work and spend most of their time drawing the things the readers care the most about.
Or how many skilled programmers find AI tools useful for quickly filling in generic boiler plate code and simple self explanatory stuff, but software of any meaningful complexity still has to be designed by hand. Because those that lean too heavily on the AI to fill in stuff they themselves don't understand quickly end up creating a tangled unmaintainable mess.
Off course there are a lot of corpo illustration work which is frightfully generic and cost sensitive. I do see Generative AI gobbling up a big chunk of that market, if it hasn't already. it plays to all their existing strengths. But then again, I struggle to think of that kind of work as "art" due to how formulaic it tends to be.
Smart AI use means less frantic typing and more thinking. Less drawing on autopilot and more creativity. Off course this could change if there's some revolutionary advancement which makes these models way better at grasping the big picture and understanding what they're doing, but these things are hard to predict. Personally I don't see it happening by the end of the decade, but I don't have much to base that off of beyond the assumption that major advancements in training will likely require a fundamentally different approach than before. Current techniques are too data hungry in training, and there just aren't enough untapped sources of high quality data left on the internet. At least I don't think there is, seeing how desperate these companies are when fighting for every last scrap of human made data.
I have no issue with AI. There is of course the prospect of the internet turning into an AI circle jerk. But in general, AI is just another tool. I mean, why use tools like Procreate then? Why not do it by hand with real physical colours and materials? Where is the qualitative difference between splicing together some stock photos and some fancy brushes, some layer effects and some masking compared to telling Midjourney or Photoshop to generate the image for you? Both are heavily software dependent and have nothing to do with anything real.
Software should empower people and AI can do just that. For example, Harvey Pekar only had a career as a comic book writer because he knew Robert Crumb. He had great ideas, but couldn't draw. Unfortunately, most people in a similar situation are not friends with Robert Crumb, so their ideas remain forever hidden away in their own minds. But with generative AI, some day soon they may be able to publish their stories anyway. Why should that be a problem?
And why is photography not a problem? No human was involved in creating the photo. Wouldn't it be more authentic art if one would actually paint the image?
Technology by and large can democratise art. Typesetting a book was a complex task, somebody would have to study and practice for years to become proficient. Today, everybody can do it, thanks to software, no human specialist being involved. Software spellcheckers have reduced the typos without any human spellchecker being involved. What's the problem then if ChatGPT becomes so good one day, so that you don't need a human editor but you can have ChatGPT edit your book?
Edit: One problematic point (apart from the circle jerk) is of course the fact that companies now try to get the rights to using other people's work. Now, I'm okay with AI being trained on published work, just like any human artist is trained on published work. Kafka wouldn't have written the way he did had he not read Dostoevsky. But private stuff has to remain private, which includes workflows and processes artists use. I would not use any software which sniffs out my private files or how I use my apps. In fact, that should be illegal. If companies want to have that kind of information, they should pay for it, hire artists who can train their AIs.
Agree with all
Yep. This is the take. I feel like there are obviously some legally-relevant aspects of the usage of the technology but I don't see any reason why those cannot be reasonably addressed and still recognize that the technology isn't inherently bad and it's just a tool, like everything else.
People want the product, they do not care how it is made or generated. You can get milk from the Amish or pay 1/5 the price and get milk from the store. I hope I am wrong and it is like Tibetan monks making a sand mandala, it isnt the same seeing a mandala made by a machine in seconds I guess only time will tell.
AI doesn't generate, it regurgitates.
This isn't accurate. It predicts. Regurgitation is generally rare, but in cases where it occurs its because the prompt leads to a prediction that can only go so many directions based on the training data.
It's also reductive and silly, because I can't tell you how many times humans have said banal phrases like the one above. Are you nothing but a regurgitator yourself? Truthfully, all of us are, to one degree or another. Ecclesiastes 1:9
it works pretty much the same as humans do, it just does it faster.
Basically, if anything you're doing is being replaced by AI, whatever you were doing wasn't great to begin with. Folks, don't get your jobs taken by something that predicts humans have eight fingers on their hand normally
Maybe try to learn about the tech next time. Your comment is completely ignorant.
I'm not a fan of it, but Pandora's box has been open and using it as a tool and not a crutch is what we need to figure out. Until it can generate a picture with the right anatomy fingers and toes, I'll take it with a grain of salt right now. It's something that needs to be watched, understood and monitored. If not, you are just going to get ran over by it.
Flux is able to generate convincing hands and fingers on a consistent basis now. Even does text tight. It was only a matter of time
I don't agree with you on this front Bryan but then I also enjoy watching videos of blacksmiths making horseshoes and guys building shelters out of sticks.
I hate AI art as well, but...
Their are genuine applications for AI in art. AI powered up-scaling would be a useful tool, for animation, generating in-between frames would be helpful to have integrated in the software, and detecting the edges you probably want when using the fill tool could also be very helpful. Two of those exist in separate programs, but integration would make the application of those features quicker and easier.
There are a lot of tedious things that don't really add to the "humanity" of a piece, and those may be accelerated/benefited with the use of a local AI. It would be a nice feature set for the people who have AI compatible hardware.
I agree, but I think this is covered by the "generative" AI distinction made in the original quote.
@@Degenerate76 Yeah, in that case I would agree that it doesn't really have a purpose in a drawing/painting app.
Most of the AI upscaling I've seen is basically the same as if you ran the image through the 2xSAI filter from emulators. It sucks.
@@JodyBruchon That's just pixel interpolation.
@@JodyBruchonThat’s just the corporate flavor of the week. The real stuff you run locally can relight scenes as if the actual product or model was in a completely different environment with perfect light and shadow and texture. You can take an image of a bottle of wine on a white background and make it look like the picture is a bottle of wine sitting in a sunny vineyard. The real models are not magic buttons, it’s not one single tool or step. It’s more like a suite of individual algorithms that combine to form a photoshop like collection of free tools. The “all in one” press a magic button gimmicks are just there to milk subscription fees from plebs.
Okay it all sounds good but if it isnt open source at the end of the day the terms and conditions could change tomorrow. It sounds like he is saying all the right things but what if he sells the business and someone else takes over? Ultimately proprietary means you cannot trust it.
Yeah “open source” almost entirely funded by the “eyes” nations and the most dystopian corporations on earth lol.
This is awesome. I have Procreate and an iPad. I’m not too thrilled about some things about this iPad but now it might rekindlemy love for creating digital art. Thank you for sharing a little positivity today.
It's not mentioned in this video, but I would like to add that Gentoo is also blocking AI made or AI helped contributions. Though they reserved the ability to have exceptions, just in case.
But this isn't because of creativity and stuff like that, it's just about the ethics, moraly and licensing part of it. They just don't want to have to deal with a potential giant mess later. And I couldn't agree more on that stance.
artists are super anti ai.
I think the problem with AI is that peoples behaviour is generally bot like to begin with. You don't need AI you can do the same thing with unthinking underpaid interns
All these people that cry and rage about AI are just butthurt artists that only use art as a means to get easy money. They don't really like art itself, because if they did, they wouldn't care, no one is going to stop them from creating art as a hobby. But as a profession, it must, and will go down.
I don't have to pay $40-70 just for a single character concept art anymore that will take hours if not days after having to communicate with an entitled human, and no one else should.
I have generated more than 100 characters for the TTRGP campaign I run, I created a few songs and music, and elevated my lore with writing I could never pull off on my own, and my players love everything (and they don't care about AI generated content as long as they have fun).
I keep seeing this argument that AI is to Art what Cars are to horses. The thing is I have seen a horse and I have seen a car- they are not the same thing, they are entirely different things. So can we agree that AI Art is not the same thing as Human made Art? AI Art is it's own thing, with it's own qualities and it's own limitations.
I also keep seeing video's that breathlessly announce that yet another brand new AI Art Generator has just been released and that it's 'the Midjourney killer' or whatever. But when I look at the sample galleries of these new AI's they look oddly similar to the sample galleries of the old AI's- it's as if all the AI Art generators were somehow distant relations that share a similar genetic inheritance.
The thing is that AI Art looks like AI Art- even when different styles are used to generate the image- it's something about the framing, the composition, the use of color and light- the absence of strong narrative or storytelling in the image. Scrolling through an AI Art gallery is like drowning in Chocolate Fudge Sundae- sure it's confectious and superficially appealing but too much of it leads to a nauseous sensation of overwhelming sweetness and creates a longing for something more intellectualy and artistically challenging and meaningful.
I use generative AI for hobby art. In my book, I'd rather spend 5 minutes waiting on AI than spend 5 hours drawing a rough outline, refining it, and iterating on shading. And I certainly don't want to pay what artists *should* be asking as a commission for the same. Do I prefer it when humans do it? Absolutely. I still draw for my own amusement sometimes. But AI is just another tool in the proverbial kit. Not something we need to bring out the torches and pitchforks for.
And yet, I anticipate the torches and pitchforks nevertheless. I predict that people are going to agitate until the only ones permitted legally to use AI are mega-corporations and three-letter-agencies. Politicians will gleefully milk fear of AI to drive reelection campaigns, and bureaucracies and legal firms will thrive on a whole new frontier absolutely festooned in red tape. I hope I'm wrong.
Yeah. It just bothers me when the tech is used in bad faith. Like flooding art sites with unlabelled low-effort AI puke that can't easily be filtered out. Or mass producing no-effort regurgitated clickbait articles far faster than online "journalists" of old. That's just shitting up the Internet for easy clout and a quick buck. And then there's the general trend of AI being shoehorned into all kinds of applications very prematurely, since every tech company now apparently HAS to be an AI company, regardless if it fits their use case. The real progress is impressive, but the hype just got way overblown.
My friend often uses generated artwork as illustrations for his D&D campaign, since it's a quick way to add a little extra flavour to our sessions and set the atmosphere. Another friend got Chat GPT to help clean up his ugly writing for his master's thesis. I myself have had a lot of fun playing with open weight image and text generators. I find it very entertaining to explore what they are capable of. Any useful tool has potential for abuse. It's just that in this case the abuse is REALLY freaking annoying since a few bad actors can crank out an overwhelming volume of slop with little consequence to themselves.
Affinity also claimed they will never go into subscription model. Now Canva acquired them and it's only matter of time when it's gonna happen. I think only a fully open source tool can compete against Adobe.
I actually emailed Notion this week to request that they remove all the AI from my workspaces (which they will do, but you need to request it).
Why the hell would I need it on a note taking app?
I love AI for internet shitposting :D
AI is vomiting what it has been told to digest; and not what it has not been told to digest. Tell it that people are not people, and it will soon become a *beep* nazAI. Was it M$ or Twitter that already did it and had to pull the plug almost immediately ?
And the tech may be better than 10 years ago, or 30 years ago when I had some interest in it.
But not much. The hype has been initiated by some jumps in computing power and data volumes that this computing power has access to. No revolution in this.
And would AI be good at anything, who else think that it would be cheating?
As a coder, I would not feel confident to deliver code I have not written myself. Let alone the security concern I read about.
I recently made few test, while looking for help about STM32 + LwIP. No useful result and I had to correct ChatGPT.
Also, a friend of mine had a chat about cow eggs. Read again.
By the way, I don't know Procrate, but I think I would prefer Procrastinate !
AI gets vastly superior year by year. Saying that it is not much better than 10 years ago is plain stupid and factually incorrect.
*insert old man yells at cloud pic*
AI is the future in every field, and nothing will stop it. Anyone that will not use AI in the next few years will not be competitive.
Artists can be as butthurt as they want, and they can keep using their bs arguments that have no relation to reality, but things will not change. But you are free to keep providing us with entertainment with your reactions and reasoning that is close to flat earther levels.
Hey Bryan, I followed you for years, then stopped when you left UA-cam.
I rarely listened your podcasts on Spotify, but this format I really enjoy,
keep going!
☺
A big Bravo Zulu to the folks at Procreate! My daughter is an aspiring artist. I might have to get her an iPad (and I never thought I would say that, like, EV-ER!)
Thanks for the coverage, Bryan.
Somehow as a society, sooo many people are opposed to artificial anything - artificial sweeteners, artificial colors, artificial fabrics, artificial leather, artificial wood, artificial light, and so on and so forth.
Artificial Intelligence should be at the top of that list.
Spellcheck is “ai”, digital cameras use “ai” to pull focus, a search engine uses “ai” to serve you results. Digital = algorithms and all ai is, is math.
@@ghost-user559 You're not wrong. But just because everything a computer does is math doesn't make something "AI".
Partly it's just the latest hot buzzword that makes investors throw money at something.
But also I think the dangerous (or at least worthy of suspicion) thing is the current crop of AI tools are claimed by their creators to be black boxes. Whether you're talking about large language models, image generators, neural networks, etc. something aspect of their output is not open. Maybe some of the code is open source, but the model won't be. Or if the model is inspectable, but the training data is considered proprietary. Ultimately their purveyors are happy to sell you the results, but they're not going to claim responsibility for them when they go wrong.
@@rhekman The Gpu is a black box. So is the cpu. Capable of anything a human chooses to do with them. All our hardware runs algorithms inside of proprietary “black boxes”. You are correct that this is just the latest buzzword, but it’s very effective. Buzzwords are used to create irrational behavior, and that can be positive reactions or negative reactions. Did you know that they were calling all computer algorithms Ai in the 50s and 60s? I watched a documentary from that time where they talked about these massive computers with a bunch of vacuum tubes before we even had transistors lol, and they were opining the “future of ai”. Can probably find it on here. The point is “generative ai” is math. It’s a math equation just like all the others. I would call it “idolatry” actually. It’s literally the attempted deification of basic mathematical equations. We don’t fear algebraic equations on a piece of paper, they do nothing without a human. Suddenly inside a computer that math is “scary” and “alive”. I played with the magic 8 ball as a kid, but I knew it wasn’t actually responding to me. Pythagoras was a cult leader who convinced thousands to worship shapes and math equations. Some things never change. It’s just full circle really.
DO IT, DOO IIT and show us.
A rare positive news always brings joy.
Seriously artist not using FOSS and believing they are "free" from something "evil", the true libre artist is the one who don't need closed source software to make Art.
Generative AI is definitely not creativity. It is copyright theft. Prompts are the only creativity involved, the LLM does everything else. That does not make you an artist.
Another ignorant one that has no idea how these models work.
You haven't got a single clue of how all this works. But you'll always have your "opinions".
@@j_shelby_damnwird What language do you develop in?
I just need a little food. LoL
Microsofts Copilot PCs... I wonder what happened to the 5G PCs. Haven't seen a sim card slot on the new devices. Can't wait for the next hype.
I think AI will become the industrial future of design and illustration, but like with artisans and tailors, human made art will continue to exist for a niche public, mostly the rich, who crave exclusivity.
The only thing generative AI is good for IMO is for quickly whipping up images of hypothetical situations for memes on twitter where spending any amount of time actually making the image manually would take too long, and the level of creativity doesn’t matter. Writing and making actual art with AI is dumb and anyone who says “crafting the perfect prompt is so hard waaahh” can stuff it.
Why would I pay 800 dollars plus a couple hundred extra for a very small number of iterations, for a book cover which is in no way objectively better, when I can fully realize my exact vision with unlimited iterations and as many stylistic changes with Ai locally for free? Why would I pay for an album cover, for an album I don’t get paid to release, when I can make my own with ai for free?
please try using procreate its very simple and easy looking on the outside but headache when using the brush settings
I thought I recognised the accent. 😁 They are an Australian Company located on a small island called Tasmania. YeeHaa. Another one for Oz.🥳
It is so fun to watch how people reject progress
I tell ya, procreate gets even better :D
10 out of 10 fully recommend
Not that you'll read this, especially on a 10 day old video, but the thing I most object to is calling it AI. All of these NN-based learning models are incorrectly formed attempts at duplicating human minds, something that isn't currently within the technological capability of humans yet, if ever. I say incorrectly formed because that's not really how human minds work. I also vehemently dislike the hype train behind "AI", but I think artists need to chill out and get over it. Yeah, the technology basically just regurgitates what others have done before, and anyone that claims otherwise doesn't actually understand how the programs work. It's a bit like mad libs with significantly many more inputs and outputs and a lot more fine-grained control over how they interact, even the art generator programs. I doubt that there's much new art to be had in this day and age, but if there is, human artists with actual skills can still compete if they learn how licensing works. If you can't create something new and unique, then are you any better than the generative programs anyway.
All that said, the only places I think "AI" programs should be banned are in automation systems for censorship and in writing programs. The former should be obvious as to why, but the latter is because a human still needs to check the correctness of that generated program and if it ever goes into a piece of software that manages real life machinery which can lead to a person's death, it will guaranteed cause someone to die.
I wonder how sure the Procreate guy is that NONE of the software developers that work for him use AI to help with their coding? 90% sure? 95% sure? 😊
And if you're reading this and thinking "but code isn't art", then you think about code the way many people think about illustrators.
Literally digital Kurt Vonnegut novel driven development, virtue signal because you can't compete realistically.
I’m not a huge fan of AI, but it feels like swimming upstream against the current trend.
Everybody: We are moving to cars.
Procreate: We’ll stick with horses.
Trying to climb a waterfall is more accurate...
AI is inevitable, it is better, faster, cheaper, nothing will stop it.
It's like people not buying tulip bulbs during the craze.
There’s a phone version of procreate that you can buy if you don’t have an iPad :)
I have an iPad, and honestly, I love the thing, it has made laptops unnecessary in my house for the most part.
I also have procreate, it's an amazing piece of software, and it's kind of refreshing to see software for which you own a license. I'm not an artist, but damn if I feel like supporting those guys.
Imagine how much better things could be if you switched back to a real computer instead of a walled garden baby toy!
@@JodyBruchon I have a $2k desktop, I've had laptops and hate them with a passion, the iPad is the best solution for my needs, battery last twice than my last laptop, the touch screen actually works, the trackpad is fantastic, the apple pencil is great, and it weighs a third of what my gaming laptop did. The compromises are minimal. Sure, the experience isn't 1:1 to what a pc is but it's a far better device than a laptop for my taste.
It's certainly better for productivity than my S24 ultra with it's gimmicky samsung dex and useless s pen.
So, instead of being a hater of a device because it has an apple logo on the back, I decided to appreciate what it brings to the table, I like my iPhone as much as I like my Samsung phone, and I appreciate Windows strenghts in gaming while I embrace the tranquility that Fedora's superior privacy brings to the table.
Only morons waste their time being haters.
@@JodyBruchonSome iPads have more compute power than a lot of desktop computers now lol. The issue is just that they don’t have very much access to software. I’m not sure if that says something about the sorry state of x86 hardware, the state of windows, Intel or all of the above. But regardless the “toys” are now more powerful and higher quality than many “real computers”. But due to the walled garden this is still obviously not a win.
@@ghost-user559 Objectively false. Show me the HandBrake benchmarks and I'll continue to laugh in Ryzen 9 7940HS.
@@JodyBruchon Well single threaded the M2 pro, which is several models old at this point got 3,914, and the Ryzen got 3,904. On Geekbench the M4 gets 3665 and the Ryzen gets 2617, the multicore is 13292 for the m4, and the Ryzen gets 12447, on ai tasks the TOPS of the M4 Npu is 38, and the Ryzen get 10. The iPad Pro doesn’t run handbrake so thats pretty much irrelevant. A tablet versus a laptop is already a difficult comparison without trying to compare software that isn’t on both platforms, but for a tablet to have a chip that performs better than your cpu by multiple metrics, even the M2 which is two iterations ago, is pretty interesting.
hopefully adam and ergo see this 😂
We should also ban photography because that steals from the painters. You guys are luddites and will be remembered as such in the history books.
Good. Generative AI art always looks off putting.
Traditional artists talked this way about digital art not too long ago and illustrators who forego new tools will find themselves very quickly undercut
But the computer isn't doing it for you in the past they didn't like it because to some art is paint or pencil this does it for you
@@karishaffer irrelevant, this isn't about 'skill', it's about productivity. people said all the same stuff, that if you draw on a wacom you aren't an artist, blah blah blah. if you want to stay relevant as a working commercial artist you need to learn to use these tools and if you don't the people who do will eat your lunch
BASED Procreate!
AI needs an asterisk and/or watermark to label it, legally required. Also should be limited in the same way genetic engineering is... supposed to be.
The former does nothing but finance more government bureaucracy which produces nothing of value. And the latter is a big mistake in my view, because it would reserve the benefits of AI to select groups of people while not limiting the harm it can cause whatsoever. In fact it's more likely to cause harm because the best defense against AI is other AI, e.g. scanning media to detect AI generation. Governments should not be trusted with the power to regulate anything beyond the defense of rights.
@@rath6375 Doing nothing, which we are doing right now, won't work long term.
@@pgtmr2713 You have no idea what the future holds, and you are only speculating that 'doing nothing won't work.' Taking irrevocable action when you don't know what to do may make you feel better in the short term but it is not a solution. Taking action when it would predictably create more problems _and_ would likely not solve the original problem is irrational.
@@rath6375 However could we possibly predict... human behavior? Have you seen that AI pic of Trump holding Kamala's pregnant belly? Regardless of where you are on ANY issue, we can all agree that while hilarious, it was stomach churning. It is already being used without any warning. So it's not a future thing, it is happening right now. How about using AI to cheat on college papers? Is that not a fraud. Potential propaganda uses by government? No thank you. I don't believe it should be used to replace people in jobs either. That will encourage people that think they're better, to oopsie several billion people out of existence, to solve the problem of people complaining about "issues." Very big problems with AI, and it's only just beginning. Government bureaucracy sucks, I'll give you that. But we can't rationalize it to doing nothing.
Does photoshop? Does digital music, which nowadays consists of zero real musicians playing zero real instruments? Does digital art? Does digital photography require this?
😮 I like to be on The winning side of any conflict😮 remember that battle where one side didn't use gunpowder because it was unethical😮 we are the Borg😮 existence as you know it is over😮 lower your Shields and defensive systems hand over your data and your art😮 your cultural and biological distinctiveness will be made to serve the larger hole😮 resistance is futile😮 did your ancestors resist fire do you resist Wi-Fi do you resist your TV😮 do you resist air conditioning😮 do you resist your car😮 stop this feudal nonsense😮 now you're going to say AI isn't human😮 so we agree that our brains are human and have souls😮 do you know about the brain organoid computer we're making AI right now out of😮 brain cells😮 we can take skin cells and stem cells electrify them and turn them into brain cells and grow them artificially😮 we're already at the point where you can rent servers face on one of these😮 and we've connected up to 16 organoids to each other😮 we've made rat human brain hybrid chimeras😮 and surgically removed the brain to grow more and then used it for basic data analysis😮 the scientific papers are all right there just literally Google organoid computer😮 resistance is futile what's done is done😮 and it cannot be undone😮
I belive all this AI bros hate artists. They love the pretty images but they don't respect the people who do it. So they want a machine to emulate them so they can have pretty images without paying or respecting any artists. I don't have respect Ai bros that support ai gens.
AI is for the rest of us.. the indie hackers who just need some quick generative something or other because we either don't have the time to do it ourselves, the talent to do it ourselves, or the money to hire professionals to do it for us.
About subscriptions on software…. As much as I hate adobe to the core, I can’t help but think software with one time payment is unsustainable. How can procreate company pay for new features released every year, which are given to customers for free? Also software maintenance is a separate work unto itself, how can procreate pay for it? Not to mention the App Store hosting fee which is recurring by Apple.
How do you think software existed for all these decades before the internet lol?
@@ghost-user559 back then software was developed extremely slowly, and it was nowhere close to today’s complexity. Today’s teenagers can write software of the 80s😂
@@asishreddy7729 Haha even today’s computers can write the software of the 80s, code llama and copilot and such. It an even write most code of the 90s and 2000’s. But still. Even then it’s only due to the “update for cash” culture that leads to an unrealistic dev cycle. I know of many incredible apps that are one time payments and are around 300$. Instead of milking their customers they *gasp* get more customers. Most people want the best they can get, and if you provide that, they would rather pay 500 to own than 50$ a year to never own. At least among “professional software” and the upper hobbyists thats the reality. Adobe was literally founded on this concept, as were most of the “big” software companies today. This myth that subscribing to a perpetually unfinished product is somehow better than delivering a complete product which has actual perpetual value was started by marketing departments lol.
@@asishreddy7729 Haha even today’s computers can write the software of the 80s, code llama and copilot and such. It an even write most code of the 90s and 2000’s. But still. Even then it’s only due to the “update for cash” culture that leads to an unrealistic dev cycle. I know of many incredible apps that are one time payments and are around 300-500. Instead of milking their customers they ,gasp, get more customers. Most people want the best they can get, and if you provide that, they would rather pay 500 to own than 50$ a year to never own. At least among “professional software” and the upper hobbyists thats the reality. Adobe was literally founded on this concept, as were most of the “big” software companies today. This myth that subscribing to a perpetually unfinished product is somehow better than delivering a complete product which has actual perpetual value was started by marketing departments lol.
Only the talentless use AI
Sorry, but they didn't' say "no ML", they said "no Generative AI" ( which is just generative ML really, we don't have ANY AI anywhere ).
Quick example of the difference : A model that takes a n layered image and outputs a perfect blend. It's not "Generative AI" in the sense we perceive it, even though it actually generates something. And anyone doing compositing would give their first born for it. Perfect blends without tedious hours of masking, feathering and whatnot? They'd jump on that wagon before you could blink.
Anyway, who cares? They don't, someone else will. Because the end user doesn't give two f's about the creators or the tools, they care about the end product. If consumers cared, we wouldn't have sweatshops competing to churn out for the lowest cost they can.
And look back a bit. Photography vs portrait painters? Motor vehicles vs coach drivers? Etc... Point in case, when your replacement comes, you go, always been, always will, it's not a new thing, it's a human thing.
Company pretending to be “in favor” of something “morally good” is the funniest thing they can do like this guy lmfao.
Sorry, pal. All the "Harry Potter, but in ..." videos on UA-cam justify the existence of generative AI. They're hilarious.
so the argument is that you feel inferior?! 😂
get a shrink
yes, and as the other guy said - there is probably the need for 5 computers, one per continent.
I think AI is great for generation of art and could be great in some cases for voice. For example in some game dev stuff I've done I make several animations and characters and blend them together in various ways. This is technically AI and that's all these art generations really do. Most art is already garbage that copies other people or is digitized from real images anyway. But this will always look like garbage compared to what even I can do let alone a real artist. The point where it is scary and dangerous is they want to push AI onto you for your taxes, for computer settings, stuff like that. That is what this is really about and what has to be stopped. That is why I am (trying anyway) to move to linux, though my new motherboard or 8400f CPU does not want to do this.
The CPU certainly isn't the problem for moving to Linux.
On the AI part, you could say that if you tell it to generate things that you imagined, it's still you doing the creation, and the AI is just (like a tool) facilitating, helping you transpose your imagination. The counterpoint is that many people aren't and won't do that.
@@Winnetou17 The CPU can cause problems in linux if it is newer. It is not high end but my concern is that it is newer and I specifically wanted a CPU with no GPU built in. It seems like it fails in the video but that makes zero sense because an rx6600 should be fine on any new linux. I also tried install with an old nvidia 260 but got problems there, too. I can install debian OK but when I log in I get some errors about amdgpu cannot init then it never goes into the desktop. I installed without the desktop and I was actually able to log in and everything was working. I thought it may be USB or WIFI issues, but I was able to install from USB and boot without desktop. I'm also able to get updates from the mirror using the non WIFI connector direct to the modem. So I am not sure what else it can really be. I'm going to set them up side by side so I can try things will looking stuff up on the web at the same time and maybe then I will finally make some progress. Or I may have to wait for the CPU to get supported if that is the issue. It was only released in april so could have an issue. That or the B650E chipset but I would think they'd support that by now.
@@LTPottenger Interesting. I still say that it's not the CPU lacking support, unless it somehow belives it has an iGPU when it doesn't. From what you say, it seems it's confused somehow about the GPU.
I can't give any actual advice, since I've never tried that combo, I'm still on an almost 8 year old laptop with Intel 6th gen CPU and an NVidia 1060 GPU. I installed Gentoo and I can't say I had any major issues or problems, though I think I had to install the nvidia proprietary drivers twice initially or something. I actually had more issues with the Wi-Fi card until I got it working.
Booting from live USB works ? Including multiple distros ? That would be a sign that it's not processor support. Unless, don't know, maybe you installed Debian and the kernel version doesn't know about Ryzen 8000, that might be a thing. But almost all other distros have a newer kernel which should instantly solve the problem. Or maybe you can upgrade the kernel in Debian too, though I don't know how easy that is.
@@Winnetou17 debian was the only one that would go live the others all hang. There's a lot of things yet to try but I have to set it up to do it while I have web access or it is just too slow going one by one. Thanks for the input though!
@@Winnetou17 I just needed nomodeset for my graphics card in the init. Once I could have both set up at once it was a snap
I use AI to make a game. For graphics, music, animations, coding. A while ago this would take a decade for me to learn to create, or capital to spend on artists.
I know those who do creative work for a living don't like it, but I love AI.
AI generated content is the future of social media posts and business infographics. Whether the Procreate creator likes it or not, if an app offers similar functionality to pro-create, but with additional AI features, they will be blown out of the water in no time 🤷♂
"AI is the future for garbage slop media" ok and?
AI is really not much different from CGI or any other digital tools that ease the labor and tedium of creating art. If people are against all digitally assisted artwork, I can understand that, but the selective outrage is rather petty. I can even support being specifically opposed to low quality AI, as I am, and that's perfectly reasonable.
That said, I appreciate good quality art regardless of the tools used to create it. When AI is properly leveraged to its full capacity as a creative tool in conjunction with existing digital art techniques and workflows, it is as capable as any other tool but with an obscene productivity advantage. It's easy to trade off that advantage for quality, which is where the problem arises, but in the hands of a skilled and dedicated artist it can rival or even transcend the output of any other digital creative tool.
Go an stuff yourself with AI. Not for us thanks.
@@maelstrom2313and how can they rival AI generated art when AI generated the art in 1 sec whereas for real artists achieving the same result will take weeks or months. After that someone like you (quoting you: for me it doesn't matter how the art was created) says that they are only willing to pay 0.5 dollars for that piece of art because they can get similar piece of AI generated art for that price. Where exactly does the money come for that artist/painter or whatever? You simply have to get a haircut and a real job in McDonald's because if your monthly salary will be 2 dollars you will be non existent at some time as you end up eating your own body parts for lunch on the street.
AI is great, I use it all the time 🤷 saves me hundreds of hours of time.
it also saves us a ton of money.
Plus we don't have to interact with entitled people like these.
Neoludites!
Technological progress is inevitable and people will decide what to do with the technology. That’s all there’s to say about this topic.
No
Boo hoo AI hurt my feels.
And thats it?
AI is the only future we have.
AI might be the future, but sure as hell isn't the present
That makes no sense at all. There is nothing even essential about A.I. It goes away completely, life goes on as it has been and evolves in different ways.
@@michaelbuddy maybe try to learn what AI can really do, and all the major benefits the entirety of humanity will have as AI advances more in the next few years.
It's like saying, we would be fine if we have no electricity, we can still survive.
@@innocentsmith6091 it is, and all the butthurt reactions prove that because they have already started feeling the changes.