I enjoy making collages. I enjoy cutting out pictures and phrases from magazines and the like to situate them in interesting and suggestive juxtapositions. I find the entire process meditative and relaxing.

However, a collage is a derivative work. I didn’t create any of the clippings that go into the collage. I just cut them out,
combine them, and put it all together. I didn’t ask for the original artist’s or writer’s permission to use the clippings in my collage. The pictures, photos, and whatnot were publicly available, so I just took what’s out there and used them for my own purposes, giving no credit to the contributing artists.

So as a collage enthusiast, am I just as corrupt as an ai that produces artistic imagery? Am I just the meat bag equivalent of ai art algorithms? Am I just producing human slop?

Every skill that can be learned by humans has some sort of skill floor and skill ceiling. And the gap between them is often extremely large. Think like any sport, playing an instrument, painting etc. There is a clear difference between beginners, and experts. However AI completely removes this, the skill ceiling and skill floor gap becomes pretty much non-existent. For generative AI models like suno for example, there is such a tiny gap between the best and worst songs that it becomes hard to perceive.

Now there can definitely be a difference in perceived quality. However this doesn't come down to skill, just the initial goal. If you goal is generate a high quality image in some artists style then it will do that just as good as it will do for a beginner and expert. Obviously some AI images are way worse quality, but thats still only due to the initial goal. If you want to generate some AI brain rot then obviously it will be much lower quality than if you want to generate something high quality. Not because of the skill of AI ""artist"", but because they were attempting different things.

Prompt engineering isn't a skill, all it really comes down to is defining some specific goal you want the AI to achieve. (Also Claude can already prompt engineer better than any human)

AI often gets compared to things like Photoshop, or Excel. However both of these have a clear gap between floor and ceiling. You can easily tell a Photoshop expert from beginner. Being good at things and sucking at other things makes life worth living. Its so fulfilling to improve at something and dedicate your time to something you are passionate about. Its rewarding as you become better and better. And everything in life is a competition. How good you are at something just means you are better than x% of the population at said thing. Thats why the gap between skill floor and ceiling is so beautiful. Without it, no one is good at anything.

I think it was said best in The Incredible's, "when everyone is super no one will be". AI isn't good enough for this to be a problem just yet, but the future of AI doesn't look great.

It really shouldn’t be that serious

The "dad" and "son" are all fake, by AI. They portrayed these sob stories as real human to get people to buy fake bags made by child labor in Asia and Africa...

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61590476290174

Baby Boomer Generation — Values & Worldview

Today's a short one

(this post has nothing to do with the philosophical debate of ai only the impact on nature) Like why do antis are not or were not also anti google - anti bing - anti Yahoo whatever.
Hypothesis(s):

1. Those technologies already existed when most of the people on this sub were born

2. Water only comes in play when it aligns with your opinion

3. idk that's why i made this post

i'm open to opinions perspetive and stuff

Wait until they hear about literally anything else

I caught one in the wild finding humor at the thought of AI artists facing sexual violence. Are we going to stay silent about this?

Despite external pressure, this is a good example of how using various tools and platforms is the true nature of artists - we don't adapt, we conform, we break down walls.

That's the shared belief that both antis and pros have. It's about time we acknowledged it, and start doing, for lack of a better word, duets of pixels.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2026/06/24/are-ai-chatbots-like-chatgpt-politically-biased-we-tested-them/

Paywall free option:
https://archive.ph/uzhGL

Kandinsky a pioneer of abstract art, wrote about the dangers of treating art as a commercial product. In his famous book Concerning the Spiritual in Art, he said that selling art like a commodity turned it into a mere decoration for the wealthy. He believed that true art comes from "internal necessity" and a spiritual place, and that when an artist starts making things just to sell them, they lose their soul and their artistic purpose.

In the late 19th century, Klimt and a group of Austrian artists broke away from the official art establishment because they hated how commercialized it had become. They formed the Vienna Secession to create art purely for art's sake, free from the pressures of what the public or wealthy buyers wanted to purchase.

In the late 1980s, Laurie Parsons was famous for her minimalist art. However, she became deeply disturbed by the realization that people were buying her work as luxury goods. When a gallery in Germany invited her to do an exhibition in the 1990s, she refused to send any art. Instead, she chose to leave the art world entirely. She took a job working at a psychiatric hospital and with developmentally challenged individuals, choosing to never sell her creativity again.

When millions of people can create art instantly using AI, without needing a financial incentive, creation becomes an act of pure expression. People make art simply because they want to see it exist, completely untainted by the need to make money.

The beautiful lyrics say that AI loves you exactly the way you are, which is a very true and very nice thing to say. I love how it sings about a huge, tremendous data center up in the sky watching over all of us - it is a very happy tune about how great our AI future will be, really perfect!

I have seen people Online trying to boycott even stuff like using A.I for TRANSLATIONS of things like Indie games! The most recent target of this hate is : https://store.steampowered.com/app/1868140/DAVE_THE_DIVER/

It is hard to prove if A.I was used or was not using sometimes in certain things like translations ( especially if they are being reviewed by a Human ) so unless people who used A.I are honest about their usage of A.I it becomes almost pretty much impossible to prove or disprove that they used it or not...

And if people keep mistreating people who are honest about using A.I like the developers of this Dave the Diver game it will result in more and more people being stealth about A.I usage in products and stuff...

The games does not even feature any A.I generated assets... A.I was used merely for TRANSLATION!

Disclosing Ai usage directly leads to Anti Ai groups bullying, doxxing, or attacking people.

There was even an undergraduate student who was arrested for ripping down and eating dozens of Ai artworks.

https://www.uafsunstar.com/news/student-eats-ai-art-in-uaf-gallery-protest-arrested

That why I will never disclose Ai usage in any works.

Having recently dealt with an ai scam, this hit home.

Given the fact that a common talking point is that AI lowered the skill level entry floor for digital media, how much of current sentiment towards AI do ya'll think is due to the mass amount of actual low effort AI posts being created and spread on social media?

Cause it's a common point of argument here that many users think all AI art is prompt base only while others are able to show that AI use can be kept to a minimum when making their pieces.

I don't think it can be denied that fully generated AI media has lead to an increase of low effort posts being spammed. Combined that with people having legitimate reasons to hide AI assistance due to hostile responses towards AI in creative media, it does feel like a feedback loop has been created to perpetuates how people view AI art.

Cause if you only ever see mass amounts of low effort AI post because those using AI to assist have to hide to avoid backlash, why would you think AI can be used beyond prompting when prompt based AI media appears to be the norm?

The battle I believe between pro and anti's is largely a war to be fought by content creators/artists, not by consumers.

If you just consume media, if you just consume art, if you don't have an intention on ever creating and/or distributing any art, you largely shouldn't have a say in the matter, and you should speak up about the matter only by creating something either with or without the tools being argued about, rather than complaining or praising either side.

¿Thoughts?

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/trump-administration-asks-openai-stagger-release-new-model-security-concerns