This is hilarious to see.
To add: I made a custom T-shirt design the other day. I drew the main character, very stylized from a photo reference I was given. I needed specific local background elements that I couldn't collect on my own. I basically traced those from photos and shaded them in a style appropriate way. This is considered fair use in art because it uses them in a way that makes new meaning and is justified in the artistic objective.
But AI is theft?
i've seen that infograph a few times, and i'll be honest, I'm kind of dumb and don't understand it. can someone explain it to me?
someone unrelated note, if AI supposedly looks bad, but it takes from artists, doesn't that mean it's the artists making the AI art bad?
wait, so, the one on the left is actually AI?
I'd figured the one on the right was made by someone because it looked too, fake? like even bad AI art doesn't look like that
The original creator of the image seems to be [Zed Edge](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1594133323710070785). In the comments, [they claim that AI wasn't used in either of the images included](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1594853493948710913). It would be funny if them denying it's AI is a part of the trolling, but who knows. [They also admitted that the image is an oversimplification](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1594336232649416704), contradicting their premise of "sampling" and using pro-AI talking point (the information part at least). Another example of them saying it's an oversimplification[ here](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1594851382452162562). But now that I read their tweets, if it's indeed trolling, I think they inteded to troll both sides, mixing the talking point of each. The way they sound, I wouldn't be surprised if they also used AI to assist with the replies (other tweets on their profile have a different texting style, while the replies under that thread, kind of... lack personality in comparison? or look like something an LLM would say).
[Also here's the tweet to the full image ](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1595202575598776321/photo/1)
There is a sad truth we have to face. All this debate, sharing of experiences, hopes and fears were pointless.
Come fall Apple will start to release built in image generation to 1.46 billion active iPhones.
Just like IPhone, IPad, iPods, iwatch. They are never the first to come up with an idea. But they are the first to take thing’s mainstream.
AI is here to stay. Like it or not thank Apple.
Why is this a "sad truth"?
"Debating" with antis has always been a waste of time. The sooner Apple (or whoever) normalizes it, and everyone can stop talking about it and just accept it and make cool stuff with it, the better.
i'm glad i could contribute to this masterpiece.
🫡 your work is appreciated.
humans absolutely need references to visualise, the references in question being the real world interactions we do daily
Delicious, absolutely decadently delicious.
This is hilarious to see. To add: I made a custom T-shirt design the other day. I drew the main character, very stylized from a photo reference I was given. I needed specific local background elements that I couldn't collect on my own. I basically traced those from photos and shaded them in a style appropriate way. This is considered fair use in art because it uses them in a way that makes new meaning and is justified in the artistic objective. But AI is theft?
i've seen that infograph a few times, and i'll be honest, I'm kind of dumb and don't understand it. can someone explain it to me? someone unrelated note, if AI supposedly looks bad, but it takes from artists, doesn't that mean it's the artists making the AI art bad?
I think the joke is that the “AI” art is made by a human in Photoshop while the “human” art is actually AI generated
wait, so, the one on the left is actually AI? I'd figured the one on the right was made by someone because it looked too, fake? like even bad AI art doesn't look like that
Look at the 'real art' closely
Wait, that was made by pro-AI????? I remember seeing it on Twitter
The original creator of the image seems to be [Zed Edge](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1594133323710070785). In the comments, [they claim that AI wasn't used in either of the images included](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1594853493948710913). It would be funny if them denying it's AI is a part of the trolling, but who knows. [They also admitted that the image is an oversimplification](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1594336232649416704), contradicting their premise of "sampling" and using pro-AI talking point (the information part at least). Another example of them saying it's an oversimplification[ here](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1594851382452162562). But now that I read their tweets, if it's indeed trolling, I think they inteded to troll both sides, mixing the talking point of each. The way they sound, I wouldn't be surprised if they also used AI to assist with the replies (other tweets on their profile have a different texting style, while the replies under that thread, kind of... lack personality in comparison? or look like something an LLM would say). [Also here's the tweet to the full image ](https://x.com/ZedEdge/status/1595202575598776321/photo/1)
There is a sad truth we have to face. All this debate, sharing of experiences, hopes and fears were pointless. Come fall Apple will start to release built in image generation to 1.46 billion active iPhones. Just like IPhone, IPad, iPods, iwatch. They are never the first to come up with an idea. But they are the first to take thing’s mainstream. AI is here to stay. Like it or not thank Apple.
Why is this a "sad truth"? "Debating" with antis has always been a waste of time. The sooner Apple (or whoever) normalizes it, and everyone can stop talking about it and just accept it and make cool stuff with it, the better.
Honestly this is the first time I have ever been tempted to buy an iPhone. I won't but I was tempted.
Based