cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/3613920
Get fuuuuuuuuuuuuuucked
“This isn’t going to stop,” Allen told the New York Times. “Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost.”
“But I still want to get paid for it.”
He cannot copyright it because he didn’t make it. He wrote a couple of words into a text box. It’s no different from commissioning an artist to draw for you, except in this scenario it is analogous to the artist turning out to be someone who traces other people’s art without their consent, and claiming you made the picture.
I love how they quoted “famous”
What a fuckin tool, for real
It’s probably a safe bet that this AI artist was also a NFT artist or procurer a few years ago.
They forgot to put “Artist” in quotes too
anyone can be an artist, but it takes talent to become famous.
You’re not wrong, but he also might not be either :)
The layers to irony in this case is almost too delicious.
“”“Artist”“”
“Famous” A"I" “Artist”
One of the very firest things I looked into when I learned about midjourney was look into the copyright matters pertaining to Ai generated art. Saw that it’s not really copyrightable, and then started using the search feature on their discord to find prompts by others for the junk I wanted.
Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost.
He made the art shown below. It’s not even good lmao, why the fuck would you declare something like that if you make the shittiest looking AI art. What a fucking clown.
It annoys me that whatever the big yellow circle is isn’t centered in the image.
That doesn’t bother me as much as when you actually zoom in on the people
Normally you paint somebody, you do so in a recognizable pose standing or caught in a frame stance that implies their motion.
Here you have someone presumably looking at the orb, But they look more like a weeble wobble. Is that their tiny little arm holding there ear? They’re not balanced, I’m not even sure the head is connected to the neck there should be meat back there right? The raw proportions are just wrong.
The overall feeling the piece conveys is pretty impressive but the actual details are bullshit.
It looks cool from a distance, but it really falls apart when you look closer
He didn’t make shit.
A computer made it. He provided some guidance.
Well in a way all Art is being done indirectly by some sort of instrument. Only the degree of sophistication or degree of separation of this instrument is different. A pencil drawing is in principle also done by the pencil, but I provided a lot of guidance through my hand. A pencil - almost no sophistication - is on one side of the spectrum and Midjourney/Stable Diffusion etc is on the other side of the spectrum.
I don’t want to judge AI “art” in general - there’s so many awful traditional artworks that AI art doesn’t really stand out.
What rubs me the wrong way is that it is a tool that no human can understand reasonably well. Everybody can understand a pencil. It’s possible to understand a computer renderer that renders digital art. But no one can understand the totality of an LLM which was trained on terabytes of images. It’s a lot of trial and error, because what the tool does generate random images even with precise directions. It’s throwing dice until one likes the result.
The one thing I give this “artist” credit for: he was very early (maye even the first?) that entered AI art into a contest and fooled the jury. Being the first is often enough historically to make “great art”. Where art is more measured n the impact it has on a societal discussion. So I give him that.
But a court already decided you can’t copyright AI art, because it’s trained on other art without permission. So he can get fucked.
The pencil does not make the art.
There’s a fundamental difference between AI image generation and an artist creating something that is both inherent and obvious.
If you can’t see that then I’m not sure there’s much help for you.
More than that, art being created by an artist has a style and a feeling behind it. There’s a nostalgia present in every painting. An artist saw something, and recreated it in a way that spoke to them.
An algorithm can recreate images that look similar but with no understanding. It’s just an image and lacks all the things that makes art what it is. By removing humanity from art you literally remove the reason for it to exist.
Flatly, it isn’t art. It’s slightly better than random. But as it happens, humans are better at that too.
Of course he didn’t, but it just makes it worse that the image that’s “ending human art” is distorted and glitchy.
Looks like a psychedalic dream and not in a good way.
Bit melodramatic. Even the real artists that midjourney actually stole from don’t claim to have lost millions individually as a result.
I said this when it was posted elsewhere- how is he calculating those millions of dollars?
Probably the same way companies tried to sue The Pirate Bay because the bay had lost them more money than existed in the world economy.
He asked ChatGPT.
RIAA and MPAA anti-piracy strategy, aka, made up bullshit.
It’s easy. He chose an arbitrary number that was very big but just shy of 99% unrealistic, according to his own flawed judgement.
I don’t even care about the “AI is content theft” arguments. No self-respecting artist would ever accuse him of plagiarism over this. It looks like garbage. The copyright office rejected his copyright claims on the grounds that he didn’t make it. Same story as the monkey selfie guy: You didn’t make the art, it isn’t your art. If a human didn’t make the art, it can’t be copyrighted.
He claims it was a mix of Midjourney and Photoshop, but honestly, I’ve made prettier things just fucking around with SDXL on my gaming PC, and I can confirm that it took absolutely no talent or effort to do it. The hardest part of the process was setting up AUTOMATIC1111, and that’s not even very hard.
And I would never even dream of taking credit for anything I’ve generated, because I didn’t make it. I just typed a bunch of wildcard arguments into a prompt and let my GPU dump out thousands of 4K wallpapers for entertainment. This guy thinks this one artifact-ridden generation has any actual value? It’s “famous” for pissing people off by competing against humans and unjustifiably winning. Being controversial could be valuable, if the controversy didn’t fundamentally render the “art” valueless by revealing that it is nothing more than a GPU vomiting up inference. The real villain in this story is the art contest organizers that stuck a blue ribbon on this slop.
Stupid tardigrade doesn’t even know how to play a violin
He’s doing his best!
Good thing it’s got a cello then.
One thing I know about violins is that they’re smaller than cellos. Cellos are what, 4 feet long? That tardigrade is like 1mm big or something, much smaller than a cello. Therefore, it’s holding a violin. Or maybe a bowed mountain dulcimer. /kidding
1mm? Dude, the scale is in the image, that’s 150μm, one tenth that size. That viola is only 50μm long.
Stupid human doesn’t even know what a violin looks like.
NGL, I am pretty tired and have my glasses off, thought he was holding a sword and shield and thought this was pretty cool.
This is great.
In 2021 I made a sound installation project called "Opéra Spatial " and entered a bunch of public prompt in mid-jouney via discord to generate images for the work. This guy made his image on year later.
I’m not convinced he is not playing 4D chess and recognizes the huuuge irony.
Then again, satire is dead.
“Famous”?
Never heard of him.
