The stated goal is that we won’t be able to tell the difference.
Wait until for them to close your account with the pretext of “your account has violated our community guidelines”, no legal justification whatsoever if some people decide to spam that report button lol stop using these bullshit platforms that see you as nothing but a number. Hell, you might be earning your life through Instagram or YouTube, and all it takes for them to delete your years of content is pressing one button.
Really sucks this ruined everything. I have no motivation for art or music because anything made in this era is suspect now and no one has any integrity. Why even release music when people probably won’t even listen to something that new. Should have stopped in 2012 boys.
This is also entirely intentional.
I bet this is because LLMs stole her art for training, so now that the LLM users have pumped out thousands of slop-art aping hers down to the colour palate and brushstrokes, her originals also get identified as also AI.
This is exactly it. Also the reason that inputting an excerpt of a classical text (cfr. Dracula, Frankenstein, …) returns “likely AI” results - it’s literally what it was trained on.
For anyone doubting Kyrgizion’s claim:
While I don’t think you’re entirely wrong, I feel like this sentiment will lead people to believing AI content checkers more. The content checkers are wrong even for newer stuff. I always default to believing something is human made because I never want to accuse a real artist for using AI.
I don’t follow, if content checkers are wrong for not being able to tell original art from AI slop because they have been trained on datasets that include the original art, why wouldn’t they also be wrong for the same reason on newer art? They would still likely absorb that newer art into their datasets.
Okay after writing it out I get what you mean, but I am thinking that the turnaround time of absorbing new art, using it to produce AI slop requests a few dozen/hundred/million times, and then calling the original works AI because the AI sloptificator can no longer tell the difference will be a constant, unless there is some way to track OC across multiple AI agents in the panslopticon.
AI content checkers will always be wrong. They’ll always sometimes flag non-AI images as AI and AI images as human made some percentage of the time. I don’t want artists to have to prove that their art is real, I want them to be able to make and share the content they want.
LLMs don’t steal art for training, image generation models are fed datasets by humans, which are then invoked by LLMs when prompted
Arguing semantics is a classic strategy of people who don’t have a valid argument to make.
Literally the “guns don’t kill people” argument.
No, words have meanings, I hate AI as much as the average lemming but “LLMs stole art” is just a horrible way to describe what actually happened. It makes it sound like LLMs are going rogue and collecting art themselves. Humans decided to train an image generation model specifically on art like the one in the OP, and just glued an LLM on top of the final model. LLMs are not the ones that do this. I wasn’t even trying to defend anything or anyone here, but I guess this place is too toxic to even use correct phrasing.
But you could have said something along the lines of “LLM companies steal data, don’t accidentally give credence to the marketing idea that these things are sentient”
Exactly what does any of that change?
It’s tracing.
Why do you think people are upset about ai “stealing” art styles then?
I had never heard of the artist before, and if you haven’t either, I cannot recommend giving her website a visit enough.
Insanely talented and really unique style.
The back edge of generated content that I don’t see a lot of discussion about is mislabeling real content, accidentally or not. It’s gonna have a monumental affect on how we consume media, even for those that want to avoid it.
Yep, this is the most important threat of Gen AI in my opinion. The erosion of trust, and the following devaluation of truth, is already hurting society so much. And it will only get worse.
Remember, it’s not just «did someone actually paint this?». It is also «did this actually happen?» and «did they actually say that?».
10000%. Its really ruined everything. So many people like myself are just sticking to media made before 2018 ish. I follow very few artists today that I know are fully legit, but have zero trust for the majority.
Thats OK. I was listening to 60s music in the 90s so I was always an old fart.
A promotional image I created for a local queer rally was deemed “AI” by the community (the image was actually the result of me sacrificing 8 hours of sleep.) The vitriol I was hit with, including one of my fellow committee members passive aggressively implying I was lying about it not being AI, was enough to make me no longer want to volunteer my time or skills for my own community.
Which is really fucking shitty. The increased lateral attacks happening because of Gen-AI pitting us against one another benefits those fucks at the top, and they didn’t even have to work for it.
+1. I was releasing free fucking music for indie devs who didn’t have budget or limited budget for this kinda stuff, some mf on reddit who was selling his music saw this, contacted admins to claim it was made via AI, then they took the post down without doing any investigation or even contacting me. Labeled as made with AI. I’ve worked in the industry for over 10 years, there’s literally 0 reason for me to use AI to make music lol From that point onward I just pulled out all of my free libraries from public, if it’s that easy to mislabel somebody’s hard work, and only give the download codes for free for people who did contact me personally and that I was sure they were actually building something.
We’re gonna have to record video of ourselves doing work at this rate.
Then they’ll claim that video of you doing the work is also generated via AI. There’s no way of convincing your regular joe once they made their mind up.
Even caught myself mislabelling real art a few times, ai has destroyed our trust in genuine human stuff
That’s by design!
There are interesting signing processes in software being done for photography in camera to help combat this, ironically some utilise machine learning as part of the process. I wonder if something similar could be done for digital art
I think this labeling was probably done by AI.
Lots of “AI detector” tools for both images and text are AI, yes. People using them don’t realize the irony because everyone wants so badly to believe there’s a way to stop all the AI fakers.
edit: please, someone come up with an actually reliable way to detect AI art, something that’s not based on probabilities that will be skewed by real artists having their art used to train AI
For images, some photoshop forensics and a trained eye. Text is a bit trickier.
Text is trickier but for now the major signs are
- corporate speech
- “it’s not X — it’s Y”
- em dashes used in the wrong place
There are others but i can think only of those rn
if only there were platforms you could migrate to that wouldnt have this problem
This doesn’t work for artists who need to make a living. The art-buying audience is not on the platforms you are talking about.
artists can make a living from insta? (please assume I am very out-of-the-loop in regards to instagram and modern art stuff)
Believe it or not, it’s a source of sales, yes.
Instagram also needs to “make a living”. They do that by making your life as an artist harder. You have to make a choice between using software that respects you and having a smaller following, or using a platform that, in every way that you can imagine, is abusing you.
I choose to eat but I’m also not worried about ai.
They do make that choice. You just don’t like the result.
Neither do they, it would seem.
Then they gotta, as the saying goes, lay in the bed they made, except they’re (helping) making it for others, too.
They want the benefit of the privacy-respecting network, they want the exposure of the artist-hostile network, but they don’t want to contribute to bringing their audience to the privacy-respecting network. That choice is 100% on them, then.
Oh honey people will not follow you. That’s just the reality.
Yeah artists don’t have it hard enough already, let’s victim blame them for trying to use tools that used to be less hostile.
“You chose one of two possible bullshit options, now stop complaining that the result is bullshit.”
They’d probably be distinctly socially liberal and full of Linux nerds. But who would want that?
Social media without fasicts?! Are you insane?!
If you think there are no fascists here…
I mean, at least here they are the black sheeps or rather, the wolves among the sheeps, they usually get downvoted to hell too (unless they are in their own bubble)
At least they stand out here. There’s no such thing as a perfect security., you can only give it your best effort.
^-^
She literally made a platform like that.
It’s the same issue with people, there’s a shitload of vibe based accusations of AI over stuff people have actually made, written, whatever. Some AI stuff has that certain look and sometimes writes a certain way, but that’s stuff that people do, that’s why AI does it too. It’s just ending up mimicking people.
Don’t personally like that certain style, whether it was made by a human or not tbh.
