So a recent post garnered some comments and reports for being AI art. In light of this we should all have a little conversation about how AI generated images should be handled in the future.
I think we all agree that AI images that are “garbage” or don’t add anything should be removed, but clearly some feel very strongly that all AI art should always be removed.
It should be noted that the rules as written and as agreed on by the community does not blanket ban AI, it merely says AI art should be avoided, while many other rules say no this or that instead.
Things to discuss:
- Does it matter if an image is AI? Does it always matter?
- What about images that are AI generated, but have been modified by a human?
- What about images where it’s hard to say for certain that it is generated? Me and the other mods did not agree on whether the recent image was AI f.ex which makes it hard to make a decision on whether or not to remove it.
- It can be stressful to artists to be accused of having used AI. If we are too militant on weeding out AI art it could be harmful as there will no doubt be some false positives.
- Should AI posts require being tagged in the title? (and of course be required to be of a certain level of quality)
I think a lot of us mods feel that AI should be allowed so long as it is not low quality and serves some purpose (being entertaining f.ex), and that the community should not be flooded with AI. What are your thoughts?
Edit: Thank you all for your input! Most of the others are sleeping right now I think, so nothing is likely gonna happen until later today.
I don’t agree with this. Copyright and Intellectual property arguments like this are the modern day equivalent of “Think of the children” but with IP holders instead of children. I’m an avid believer in piracy and information access and this sounds like pro-copyright dogma to me.
What I think is a better solution is to have open-source and self-hostable models like AIhorde which aren’t corporate in nature and don’t make money. They are open-source projects that anyone can run or contribute to. But screw copyright and screw IP gatekeeping, I’m not going to justify or rationalize this with what are ultimately the same slippery slope arguments used against piracy
What are the large corporations being hurt by AI copying the artists they hired art style that would make that argument similar to “Think of the children” argument?
You sound like a troll, for the record I didn’t distinguish between large companies, I said that pro-copyright sentiment and anti-piracy arguments of any kind are modern “think of the children” arguments. All pro-copyright sentiment, no discrimination here. The fact that you’re trying to put words in my mouth proves you aren’t and never were arguing in good faith.
It proves that i misunderstood your point
Most arguments i have seen for copyright are ignoring how it can and is being exploited by large corporations. The original argument, however, is against the morality of AI, not for current copyright law
Could you please explain why you believe this specific argument is similar to “think of the children”?
No, AIHorde still uses corporate models. The only open source part is distributing the computation.