Saw this being hyped like it’s some historic victory lol. This was a settlement, not a court ruling. Anthropic paid out because it was quicker and cheaper than years of fighting, that doesn’t set a precedent. The internet runs on copying. Anyone can download an image, mp3, or pdf in seconds. Most people agree to Terms of Service without reading them, which already allow companies to store, analyze, and process data. That’s just the digital world we live in.

The only tricky part for AI companies is when they monetize. If they charge for services trained on copyrighted data, that opens the door to damages claims. But calling training “theft” doesn’t add up because nobody’s original work is gone, it’s still there, still sellable. That is called copying, not stealing or whatever the anti ai side twists it as.

Fair use hasn’t been decided yet. That’s where the real legal battleground lies, and it’s way more complicated than the “AI bad, give us money” talking point.

Hypothetically? Let’s say if these authors tried suing a heavyweight like Google or OpenAI, it wouldn’t go the same way. Bigger companies have the money and lawyers to fight all the way through, and that’s where we’ll see the real fair use decisions get made.

So yeah, let the antis celebrate this “win”, but in the long run, it’s not changing the bigger picture.

AI has made a lot of cool pictures for us, so I drew something for it in return. (✿◕‿◕)

I know that art doesn't quite belong in this community, but I am hoping it will be alright since it's pro-AI activist art. (and it's not AI so it doesn't really fit in the AI art subs either)

lately they been using this accusation ALOT.

I'm pretty sure there are some vtubers that support Ai Art

Found on the underscore sub. Guy explains why pro AI arguments are bad using an AI voice, and the antiAI crowd are praising him.

I didn’t censor my username in the first picture but like that’s me I’m not putting a random person on blast plz don’t take this down 😭🙏

Anyways… what do you guys think?

So recently I am seeing videos of big brands using Ai. These videos often look amazing. Then I went down to the comments. People were simply dismissing it cause it's "Ai." The truth is , Ai is here to stay! Someone didn't just type a prompt and make the video if that's what these bots keep wondering. It still took work. Before the iPhone came out phones were not as easy to use as they are today. The same thing with Ai. Now art is easier to make. Possibilities that were impossible before are now possible. Ai did not kill creativity. It just exposed the human condition. Not all Ai videos look good. The ones that creative minds do look amazing. There are people without access to studios and can't draw but still have highly creative minds. It's time for these minds to shine and much more. :)

Context is basically someone calling regular old art AI slop without proof.

If you believe that anything generated by AI isn’t creative you should probably get off the Internet, stop using anything man-made, even you using a paintbrush and paints and a canvas already made by someone is pre-manufactured unless you’re doing it yourself. You’re complaining about the wrong thing. It’s pretty ridiculous. Grow the fuck up guys. This shitty little AI is taking your job. Mentality is really pathetic. I’m sure a lot of you would agree with me.. this is just more of a rant about the experience that I’ve been seeing with some of these anti ai .

Just a small epiphany I had recently. Frequenting home made board and card game subreddits, I see people often posting WIP versions of their games, often with AI-art as placeholder images. They are always very careful to make a note that the AI-art (while often quite pleasing to the eye) is only a placeholder, and 'real artist' will be employed to make the final version. Can't blame them, nobody wants to get downvoted. But there is something rotten with needing to put up disclaimers like this.

I've nothing against hiring an artist (regardless of the tools they use.) But these kind of attitudes lack appreciation. It's akin to how people would treat a genius with leprosy. "Sure, they have great ideas and we love what they produce, but just don't come too close."

What I see is AI powered art opening the floodgates to new revolution of art and expression. The fact is that these board and card game subreddits are booming precisely because of AI-generators enabling expression. It's a shame we treat them with such a lack of gratitude. We should be revered and amazed instead, but we are cynical and rotten. We should be embracing AI-art to the fullest and use it to enhance our capabilities and create the wildest works of art beyond our imaginations. It's a tragedy that it gets pushed into under the stairs and shamed like a an adopted wizard kid in a muggle family (of course eventually it can't stay subdued)

Pardon the formatting. I tried.

Here are some charges throw against use of AI generation:

:+: Because it is easy to produce output, means what is produced cannot be quality.Well, a pencil is easy to produce output with, and can produce quality output in the right hands. Low barrier to entry does not mean one cannot have quality output. Labeling all generative AI output as slop makes this charge.

:+: The flip side is also held by antiAI creators that generative AI is also too good. AI slop looking journeyman decent can flood feeds.

• Does to quality content face this issue? The issues are over what is in social media feeds, not main distribution channels. Yes, there is Velvet Sundown, but... if one believes in human ability, shouldn't humans rise the top?

:+: AI content must be stopped. It is denying artists opportunities. If AI content were eliminated, people would use artists more. The personal implication by the artist claiming this charge believes they personally will be denied exposure due to generative AI content and people will not hire them or pay for their artwork. * Acquisition of art is an elective thing, not a requirement. Removing options does not mean people will be forced to select from lesser choice. They may opt to select nothing. Removing generative AI content does not mean more opportunities. * However, lost in the noise is a valid concern. It is without generative AI. Being found is an issue. There is need for billion dollar solutions, like Google made money off of.

:+: AI output is souless. It is not reflective of who an artist is. One gets to know an artist through "real" art. * First, who says the only point of art is as a reflection of an artist? * Second, having the ability to have a tool generate an infinite amount of works from a perspective different than an artist using it is more powerful than from being married to the identity of the artist. Being freed of the limitations of certain genres and medium allows a creator to manifest more that what the timeline used to afford them.

There are other arguments and issues. I wanted to focus on the challenges artist face, as connected to generative AI. Issue what quantifies as protected intellectual property is out of scope. That is another can of worms. I am not getting into that here. I can say intellectual property protection is for the benefits of society on the whole, not creators. They are government forced monopolies so that creators feel safe releasing ideas into the world.

Who’s going to tell them that AI te

Curious question I feel like this is the right community to have this discussion, so I’ve been making a fandom art/ tinkering with the idea of making a radio station for the video game fallout, however, since I’m not the greatest artist or writer, /singer, I’ve been using AI for assistance. However, at the end of the day I’ve come up with a large number of the concepts, such as this character, his name, the radio frequency broadcast, the Lore, even a lot of of the funny scenarios that I am programming into the radio station. And the music itself.. my question is this considered art or is this just an AI generated project?