whats really sad is when I see artists that are supposed to be of actual integrity like musicians using AI art out of straight laziness or a meager means to save a few bucks
Man am I ever glad someone mentioned this. People don't think about what they are doing and what the long term consequences are. Another thing they are doing is using the same titles (I am guessing suggestions by youtube) like "You won't believe what happened to...." or "He just ended so and so's career" or any of the other titles I see over and over and over. AI voices are the other thing. It is the height of laziness when a creator can't even narrate their own video and I refuse to watch them if they do.
Same. It feels hollow. Even if the wrote the script, something about it missing. It lacks the genuine human element. Is this person really invested with what they are telling me? Did an AI write it too? Maybe why I go out of my way to find older D&D books. Back when the art looked less professional. I can see the humanity in the imperfect art.
I've been getting some enjoyment picking out all the ai screwups in these. One channel is vintage oldies by a fire etc using ai disney characters and the mutations are hilarious
You don’t know what you’re talking about. Transformative use is fair use. And there is nothing more transformative than having a computer “look at” a billion images and making a mathematical model. It’s the most transformative thing humans have ever done. Or are you going to pick and choose what kind of fair use stuff you “decide” is okay sn which is not? For example…half of all the Youtbe videos out there are “reacts” videos. People react to news articles and offer their own commentary. They read an article about evil corporations raising prices in the midst of inflation…and the sprinkle in their thoughts. Is that “okay”? It’s “okay” in that case? It’s okay to “take” the article and use it in a fair use way…and make money from the UA-cam ad revenue? But it’s not okay for the AI company’s to “take” images to train their own math model? Or how about parody cartoons? Someone makes a parody cartoon of Star Wars characters. Is that okay? And then they sell it to The Atlantic magazine? It’s okay to use fair use in that case and get paid for it? See? If we prove and dig we will find that you are just “deciding” what you think is “okay” and what is not “okay” based on nothing other than your feelings. If your feelings tell you it’s “okay”…then it is. And if your feelings tell you it’s “not okay”…then it isn’t. But that’s why we have the law. Because other people feel differently. Other people feel it IS “okay” to make a math model by having a computer look at a billion images. And who is to say that your feelings on that issue are of more weight and value than theirs?
@@CrimeCraftADHD Explain where specifically he is wrong if you want to change his, or anyone's mind. Because just announcing someone is wrong isn't exactly convincing.
@@mikerude5073 well he does that as well so, no, I don’t owe anyone an explanation- they don’t get to decide these things because of their feelings about AI
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
whats really sad is when I see artists that are supposed to be of actual integrity like musicians using AI art out of straight laziness or a meager means to save a few bucks
Let them use ai art so I know imediately that I will not watch that shit
that's fr
Man am I ever glad someone mentioned this. People don't think about what they are doing and what the long term consequences are. Another thing they are doing is using the same titles (I am guessing suggestions by youtube) like "You won't believe what happened to...." or "He just ended so and so's career" or any of the other titles I see over and over and over. AI voices are the other thing. It is the height of laziness when a creator can't even narrate their own video and I refuse to watch them if they do.
Same. It feels hollow. Even if the wrote the script, something about it missing. It lacks the genuine human element. Is this person really invested with what they are telling me? Did an AI write it too? Maybe why I go out of my way to find older D&D books. Back when the art looked less professional. I can see the humanity in the imperfect art.
I absolutely agree, AI art is taking over most websites and it's making a lot of artists furious since it steals art that they make.
I've been getting some enjoyment picking out all the ai screwups in these. One channel is vintage oldies by a fire etc using ai disney characters and the mutations are hilarious
HELL YEA. I agreed with you.
Metoo even i see everywhere across the internet it need to stop of insane Ai art was very confusing of the picture
Based
The pixels can't hurt you. Artists aren't entitled to our time and money. Ai images are transformative.
You don’t know what you’re talking about. Transformative use is fair use. And there is nothing more transformative than having a computer “look at” a billion images and making a mathematical model. It’s the most transformative thing humans have ever done.
Or are you going to pick and choose what kind of fair use stuff you “decide” is okay sn which is not?
For example…half of all the Youtbe videos out there are “reacts” videos. People react to news articles and offer their own commentary. They read an article about evil corporations raising prices in the midst of inflation…and the sprinkle in their thoughts.
Is that “okay”? It’s “okay” in that case? It’s okay to “take” the article and use it in a fair use way…and make money from the UA-cam ad revenue? But it’s not okay for the AI company’s to “take” images to train their own math model?
Or how about parody cartoons? Someone makes a parody cartoon of Star Wars characters. Is that okay? And then they sell it to The Atlantic magazine? It’s okay to use fair use in that case and get paid for it?
See? If we prove and dig we will find that you are just “deciding” what you think is “okay” and what is not “okay” based on nothing other than your feelings. If your feelings tell you it’s “okay”…then it is. And if your feelings tell you it’s “not okay”…then it isn’t.
But that’s why we have the law. Because other people feel differently. Other people feel it IS “okay” to make a math model by having a computer look at a billion images. And who is to say that your feelings on that issue are of more weight and value than theirs?
Your comment tells me you are not an artist. You're into tech, that is not art
@@MrBuzzzzz you are wildly incorrect.
@@CrimeCraftADHD Explain where specifically he is wrong if you want to change his, or anyone's mind. Because just announcing someone is wrong isn't exactly convincing.
@@mikerude5073 well he does that as well so, no, I don’t owe anyone an explanation- they don’t get to decide these things because of their feelings about AI
I just watched your video Welcome to the BrandonZone! (ad #2) and it's inspired me to never directly support a human artist ever again. Great job.
It isn't his fault that you can't see past your nose
AI has rights too there people too
lmao