196

I think whatever your stance on the ethics, trying to ban AI as a method of production is futile. Images created using AI are nearing the point of being indistinguishable from images created using other methods. Jokes from last year about how AI can't get the number of fingers on a hand right already seem outdated. It will soon become impossible to tell the difference between AI and non-AI imagery with any certainty, and we've already crossed that threshold for some images. That means a ban is ultimately not going to work. There's obviously lots of bad quality AI content out there, but there's also lots of bad quality content out there in general. I think focusing on the quality is more relevant than the method of production.

I had to teach a class using modern photoshop two years ago and the AI features in Photoshop are inescapable. Of course, people will turn them off (I did because they’re annoying on an interface level if nothing else) but judging by the comments here, I doubt people have any idea how much AI is in the work they see, since they don’t seem to understand the scale at which its employed in regular graphic design tooling at this point.

Aside from that the question of whether something’s art or not is just silly and gatekeeping. If someone put a bunch of low quality sketches that was their shit web comic (I seem to recall some guy did for like 2 days here) people rightfully tell them to get that shit out of here. No body likes bad art, whether it comes from an AI or not. If people want to make it ideological, given what I mentioned above, I suppose it depends to what level moderation wants to succumb to ideologues.

a human manipulating a generated image still doesnt make it art. it can be a nice picture and the tech behind making it can be neat, but it's not art. that said i just dont engage on posts i know are ai content. presenting a generated image without being clear about it is just being a dick. it dosesnt have to be in the title but it should be aknowledged. i dono if a full ban is needed but if i wanted my feed full of slop i'd be subbed to communites for ai, or .world's 196. this place seems more about snark and joy, which ai rarely brings out.

I'm more lenient than most of the other posts, mainly because at this stage I think filtering and moderation is difficult to do. I also think arguing about if AI art is bad or not is a bit late now given it's everywhere in the open public domain. Was it wrong in how it was generated, absolutely. I don't think at this point using that as a rallying cry is useful, especially since so many memes do the exact same thing, piggybacking on someone else's work.

So I think stick with original rules of higher quality and don't try to chase the impossible path of determining origins. If anything have in the rules that AI generation be labeled as such to let those who want to avoid it for whatever reasons be able to filter them out. I don't think the mods should have to become experts on AI detection (like anyone is at the rate it's going).

oki, here's my stanc

~(gen-pics~ ~mean~ ~ai~ ~images~ ~here)~

• i wud enjoy gen-pic ban

• bt its almost impossibl cuz gen-pics r supr gud now n hard to tell if fake
• new image gen is not prompt -> result anymor - but mor lik an LLM puts together multipl elements n iterativli improves images, lik specificlli addin text to onli smol bit--- "source" here
  • this makes it evn hardr to tell if imag is gen pic... which i thinksies is bad
• mayb we employ som gen pic detector if we're unsure? seems lik best option, cuz evn i, who kindsa knows how stuffsies wrork, cnt tell anymor ;(
• bannin gen pics alsuu removs funi shrek stealin from white house found footag... which... im oki with- bt its kindsa a loss kindsa

so yis, im for gen pic ban n alsuu wan to hav detection tools if were unsur - if u wan ai 196 head ovr to lmmi wrorld i feel...

alsuu - if gen pics wud be fulli allowd - id hav to go outta my way to hide evri singl one when i see one... which i dun lik ;(

a gud way to think bout it is dis:

• when i read text n go "oh... dis is llm genratd" i immediatli stop readin
• samsies for gen pics

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

Pretty much sums up my view of it. It's a shame it's vilified since it's good at making short comics and memes. I'd also rather original ai content then reposts personally.

I can understand certain subs being against it, like traditional art subs and subs relating to shows where movie stills are preferred (the star trek ones for instance). But in the end, this is a meme sub.

That being said, it's seriously polarizing and every post with even a hint of AI turns into a fight. Tagging is at least a small compromise but I don't think it will do much without filtering. Maybe an option would be to ask users who wish to post AI content to use an alt classified as a bot, so users can filter it that way while we wait for a proper flair system.

I think AI art should be allowed. It doesn't matter if a shitpost is AI or not, and witch hunting should always be punished. There are too many people out there harassing and hurting people online. Their behavior should be discouraged.

Edit: It should be allowed just for the reason that people don't need the excuse to act out. I can't state an opinion without them feeling like they need to downvote to punish me.

I think the strongest argument against a blanket ban is creators like Obscurest Vinyl who clearly have actual talent and vision that lets them put out 100% ai generated art that is actually art. It seems to me that it's harder to make AI images that are actual art, and I'm personally okay with a flat-out ban on AI-generated images, but this also cuts out stuff like ai-generated Pixar movie posters or security footage of Yoda robbing a gas station.

As for false bans, thats why ban appeals exist.