HOME | DD

Description
I will write here replies to objections to avoid feeding trolls. I ask you to read them, because even though their main purpose is notoriously to weaken their adversary through anger, they can still propagate a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt. We have seen it repeatedly in the last decade.

- AI IS HERE TO STAY AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT
I don't expect it to go away, in fact I recognize it's impossible. However, this technology is so new, that we still are in the phase of confining it into clear, common morality borders. Right now AI has huge problems that regard authors' rights, privacy and the value itself of art.
AI is a great tool when used correctly. I have used ChatGPT in few occasions to get some mild help. What I'm fighting is using AI to claim to be artists. An algorithm does not think like a human. An algorithm can only reproduce what has already been done. At least until they somehow gain self-awareness.

- THE COMMUNITY HAS REALIZED THIS DEBATE IS USELESS
Nice try. Just because the debate isn't as enflamed as in November, it doesn't mean it disappeared. Have a look at how many companies announce some new feature with the word "AI" on an almost daily basis. This kind of attitude is the same that discourage people not to vote in elections because "what can change anwyay"? You can still avoid making things worse.

- THE "SHOW LESS LIKE THIS" FEATURE IS USELESS.
It is a tool that takes time. Its main purpose is training DeviantArt's algorithm into proposing you less posts that are tied to that style, and accounts linked to it. Due to the constant flood of spambots, it is impossible to have a perfectly clean homepage, but it is still a tool.

- IF YOU CALL THROWING PAINT AT A WHITE CANVAS AND SELL IT FOR 100K ART, THAN AI ART IS ART
The definition of what is art and what is not is alays subject to discussion. I put the "AI is not art" on purpose not as an absolute, but as a discouragement to consider AI-generated pictures as actual art, in favor of whatever has actual humans behind. Throwing paint at a white canvas is art, if there is a meaning or an intention behind it. Search for Jackson Pollock

- HUMAN ARTISTS ARE OBSOLETE / THIS IS ART CONSERVATISM
This hides a way of thinking according to which technological progress is always good. To prove the opposite, it is sufficient to say that if I develop a weapon that can destroy half of humanity in one click, I have certainly made an enormous technological progress. But if you think I've done something positive, then you have a problem.

- HOW IS THAT SUDDENLY ARTISTS ARE GETTING CONCERNED ABOUT WORKING CONDITIONS?
How do you know no artists didn't use to before? Don't tell me someone like Banksy doesn't.

- YOU'RE BEING A GATEKEEPER
Sometimes, it's the right thing to do. Nobody is forced to keep in a group someone who disrupts that group.

- YOU'RE TRYING TO CONVINCE YOUR LIES ABOUT THEFT ARE TRUE
First of all, look at the pic again and you'll see the word "theft" does not appear. Don't put in my mouth things I never said. But if you're referring about a reply I left to one of the other objections, where I say AI has huge author's rights problems, AI literally copies artists' styles (that already is close to identity theft) and also their signs (because it believes they're just part of the work). Without any regulation, in the future we may get AI that generates millions of pics that mimick a famous dead artist, without any consideration for the artist's story, their last wills, what their evolution might have been and so on.

- YOU'LL DELETE AI PROMOTERS' POSTS, PROVING THEM RIGHT
Right now (2023/04/01, 22:36 UTC+2), the only comments from AI promoters I have actually deleted have been two people who have spammed troll comments to whoever commented positively this pic. That is a behavior I cannot tolerate. All the other ones are still visible and will remain visible. Including yours.

EDIT: Replaced the last advice about how to spot an AI image with a new rule suggested to me by fermin-tenava . It was related to tags, which is already in the other ection

Description
I will write here replies to objections to avoid feeding trolls. I ask you to read them, because even though their main purpose is notoriously to weaken their adversary through anger, they can still propagate a lot of fear, uncertainty and doubt. We have seen it repeatedly in the last decade.

- AI IS HERE TO STAY AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT
I don't expect it to go away, in fact I recognize it's impossible. However, this technology is so new, that we still are in the phase of confining it into clear, common morality borders. Right now AI has huge problems that regard authors' rights, privacy and the value itself of art.
AI is a great tool when used correctly. I have used ChatGPT in few occasions to get some mild help. What I'm fighting is using AI to claim to be artists. An algorithm does not think like a human. An algorithm can only reproduce what has already been done. At least until they somehow gain self-awareness.

- THE COMMUNITY HAS REALIZED THIS DEBATE IS USELESS
Nice try. Just because the debate isn't as enflamed as in November, it doesn't mean it disappeared. Have a look at how many companies announce some new feature with the word "AI" on an almost daily basis. This kind of attitude is the same that discourage people not to vote in elections because "what can change anwyay"? You can still avoid making things worse.

- THE "SHOW LESS LIKE THIS" FEATURE IS USELESS.
It is a tool that takes time. Its main purpose is training DeviantArt's algorithm into proposing you less posts that are tied to that style, and accounts linked to it. Due to the constant flood of spambots, it is impossible to have a perfectly clean homepage, but it is still a tool.

- IF YOU CALL THROWING PAINT AT A WHITE CANVAS AND SELL IT FOR 100K ART, THAN AI ART IS ART
The definition of what is art and what is not is alays subject to discussion. I put the "AI is not art" on purpose not as an absolute, but as a discouragement to consider AI-generated pictures as actual art, in favor of whatever has actual humans behind. Throwing paint at a white canvas is art, if there is a meaning or an intention behind it. Search for Jackson Pollock

- HUMAN ARTISTS ARE OBSOLETE / THIS IS ART CONSERVATISM
This hides a way of thinking according to which technological progress is always good. To prove the opposite, it is sufficient to say that if I develop a weapon that can destroy half of humanity in one click, I have certainly made an enormous technological progress. But if you think I've done something positive, then you have a problem.

- HOW IS THAT SUDDENLY ARTISTS ARE GETTING CONCERNED ABOUT WORKING CONDITIONS?
How do you know no artists didn't use to before? Don't tell me someone like Banksy doesn't.

- YOU'RE BEING A GATEKEEPER
Sometimes, it's the right thing to do. Nobody is forced to keep in a group someone who disrupts that group.

- YOU'RE TRYING TO CONVINCE YOUR LIES ABOUT THEFT ARE TRUE
First of all, look at the pic again and you'll see the word "theft" does not appear. Don't put in my mouth things I never said. But if you're referring about a reply I left to one of the other objections, where I say AI has huge author's rights problems, AI literally copies artists' styles (that already is close to identity theft) and also their signs (because it believes they're just part of the work). Without any regulation, in the future we may get AI that generates millions of pics that mimick a famous dead artist, without any consideration for the artist's story, their last wills, what their evolution might have been and so on.

- YOU'LL DELETE AI PROMOTERS' POSTS, PROVING THEM RIGHT
Right now (2023/04/01, 22:36 UTC+2), the only comments from AI promoters I have actually deleted have been two people who have spammed troll comments to whoever commented positively this pic. That is a behavior I cannot tolerate. All the other ones are still visible and will remain visible. Including yours.

EDIT: Replaced the last advice about how to spot an AI image with a new rule suggested to me by fermin-tenava . It was related to tags, which is already in the other ection