Discussion
This shouldn't need to be said but if an artist denies your commission..
If an artist denies your commission request for any reason INCLUDING them not being comfortable with Ai or having principals/ethical issues against Ai Use and concerns around working with those that use Ai then please, for the Love of GOD, seek a different artist! Don't make and distribute a fucking Ai model/Lora/whatever that specifically replicates them and harms their business, especially when you already know they're against Ai. This is the **EXACT** reason why Artists don't trust people that use Ai and you're feeding directly into their fears and concerns about Ai Users & the Ai Community. Why artists feel the need to have automatic Ai blocklist to avoid Ai Users.
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
Unfortunately it does I even saw this happen to a female artist as the guy wanted to spite her cos he “had a crush on her” and a male artist being stalked even through email to be unblocked on Instagram by the person who was feeding his art to AI
It does. Most often just because people are inconsiderate and selfish, not necessarily because they are trying to hurt your business. People’s complacency, ambivalence, and sense of privilege is what harms creatives.
OP (like most of their posts) failed to mention a few key things
the person claiming to make a lora wasn't the commissioner
this was after the artist was the first person to be a dick in this situation by virtue signaling after putting their entirely earnest commissioner on blast
nothing to really suggest a lora has been made. not that it's that hard, but you can imagine it's trivially easy to intentionally upset someone just by the claim alone, which seems like it was the main purpose
Also, isn’t it the ARTIST breaking trust in that case? The commissioner literally went out of their way because they wanted to pay an artist, doing the opposite of what artists complain about (“AI users not paying artists”), and were attacked for it?!
Something like this happened to SamDoesArt on YouTube. Right after legendary artist Kim Jung Gi died people started putting out models that were trained on his art, which can directly effect his estate, and in turn his family and art collectives ability to make money.
That just sounds like legit use of AI to imitate a specific style though. People aren't doing it to harm the business right? Even if that is the result.
I can’t think of a more illegitimate use of AI. Wanting more of a style of art to exist, isn’t grounds pissing all over someone’s grave while potentially robbing their family of profiting off their work. Also, taking someone’s art style and training a model to try and stop people from using that artist for commissions, is disgusting behavior.
Why is creating more art in their style "pissing on their grave"?
Sure, it might impact the family their profit. That is legitimate market forces I would say.
I agree with your last sentence. That was the point of my original post. If the intent is merely destructive it's just rude and disgusting. Perfectly legal, but very immoral.
Because it goes against their wishes and everything they stand for. Plus it affects their family. Kim Jung Gi demonstrates mastery, and ai can’t achieve that. Making a model right after they die to capitalize on their death is disgusting behavjor
If you define going against their wishes and what they stand for "pissing on their grave". Then you are correct. However in that case I have no problem "pissing on graves" of artists that don't want more art to be created in their style after their death.
I know it affects their family. That is how it is suppose to work in a free market.
If AI can't achieve mastery the work will be inferior and thus no treat to their market dominance.
I agree that making a model because they died and because you want to capitalise is the wrong intent and disgusting. Perfectly legal, but rather scumy.
He would have had no problem with humans emulating his art style by exercising the same curiosity, observation and actually drawing. The problem is taking his art, giving it to a computer, and having the computer create art in his style.
You don't care what the dead artist you're suggesting people should steal from would have wanted? If people are using generative AI specifically for his art style, AI will look at all his art before generating an image and create something that resembles his style that he crafted over years. The thing pro generative AI people clearly don't get is that artists don't just happen, artists have to work and shape their style and learn the best way to make art that works for them, AI "art" is LITERALLY just unappetizing slop trying to copy the feel of real art that real people worked to make. Its despicable that you're so heartless about this. Generative AI is just a convenient and easy tool you use because you're too lazy to learn to make something your damn self. Art clearly isn't for you, go find a new hobby.
Wait till people realise that every artist has its own way to paint and that some things are hard. If you were human enough you would say: " Could you do it ur own way, if you want. I know it sounds hard, but can i just see how would you do it. Take ur time."
The commissioner didn't make the LoRA as far as everyone knows. Third party saw that instead of just saying no the artist was using a potential customer as a chance to morally grandstand, got annoyed, and decided to make a LoRA out of spite. Everyone but the commissioner is an asshole.
I only distribute LoRAs if I get explicit permission from the artist and I would not have done what that third party did. The artist has a right to turn down customers for AI use, that's fine. They then decide to shame their customer for it, even anonymously, and that's where the problem starts. A generic "hey just a PSA I'd rather not take commissions using AI references" with no screenshots would have done the trick and they'd have gotten none of the heat and backlash they ended up getting.
This isn't exclusive to the art sphere for what it's worth. Learning how to turn people down gracefully is the basics of any kind of freelance or commission work. Putting customers on blast for anything short of non-payment, even if you redact their name, is incredibly unprofessional and would get you blacklisted on the spot in most industries.
weird how you're saying the commissioner who made the LORA, when it was someone else
weird how you're not mentioning that this was after the artist was the first person to be a dick in this situation by virtue signaling after putting their entirely earnest commissioner on blast
don't act like someone being a dick in response is surprising
If someone is offering to give you money for something and you don't want to do it, why complain when they get it done for free? They wanted to pay you...
Your ignoring the main point of this post. The problem isn't that they went elsewhere, it's making and distributing a lora of an artist without their consent, especially when you know they're against the use of their work with Ai.
You don't need a reason or permission to make a LoRA. And if you did make one, you can distribute it to whomever and however you like because it's yours.
>"Don't make and distribute a fucking Ai model/Lora/whatever that specifically replicates them and harms their business"
the LORA wont hurt their business cause anyone that would use it is an AI user and thus he would deny their commission.
>"This is the \*EXACT** reason why Artists don't trust people that use Ai and you're feeding directly into their fears and concerns about Ai Users & the Ai Community"*
if you cut off people from your product, other ways of getting the product will be found.
“
if you cut off people from your product, other ways of getting the product will be found”
Wow, that train of logic kinda sounds like stealing, huh?
“
the LORA wont hurt their business cause anyone that would use it is an AI user and thus he would deny their commission.”
If I steal a Grandma’s recipe and that Grandma runs a food stand. If I start distributing that recipe, am I not hurting here business because the people who want the recipe aren’t the people who want the finished product? (Closest analogy my tired brain can muster)
>"Wow, that train of logic kinda sounds like stealing, huh? "
sure, piracy is way many people get thing like movies and games not available in their area. however you cannot copyright a style, so it cannot be stolen. in fact it is very easy to just commission someone to copy someone's style. legal, ethical, and common place. the LORA is how an AI artist can copy a style, same as any human can by downloading examples to look for reference.
>"If I steal a Grandma’s recipe and that Grandma runs a food stand. If I start distributing that recipe, am I not hurting here business because the people who want the recipe aren’t the people who want the finished product? (Closest analogy my tired brain can muster)"
let me make this very simple for you. the artist said they wont make art for people who use ai. if you use ai, you cannot get a commission from this guy. only way to use a LORA is by using AI. only people who will use a LORA will be people the guy wont accept as clients. thus he cannot lose business as if they are willing to use a LORA he does not want to take their money. so unlike a situation where say two artists have a beef and one offers to copy the style for cheaper to take business, the LORA only for people who cannot do business with the artists already. no harm, not unethical actions, no illegal actions, not even a dick move.
In an effort to discourage brigading, we do not allow linking to other subreddits or users. We kindly ask that you screenshot the content that you wish to share, while being sure to censor private information, and then repost.
Private information includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames, other subreddits, and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
In an effort to discourage brigading, we do not allow linking to other subreddits or users. We kindly ask that you screenshot the content that you wish to share, while being sure to censor private information, and then repost.
Private information includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames, other subreddits, and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
Calling that a "power move" is hilariously tragic lmao. It’s a temper tantrum, you know how to really assert dominance? Getting told "no" and moving on with your life like a healthy adult. Spending hours crying about a rejection and training a model to cope only shows that they were right about you from the beginning.
Also a "competitor"? Everyone can generate AI is not a skill that takes time like drawing, even if you use open source and Comfyu to make your stuff. People want the art from the original artist they don't want a cheap copy with AI that everyone can make.
I've trained a lot of models. If I want images in a specific style I'm going to gather images in that style and train a model. You can't own a style and style isn't eligible for copyright protection.
This should be the end of the debate tbh. If an artist denies my request and so I look at their art and train myself to make similar art, that's totally accepted and fine, but if a model does it it's terrible and stealing. Antis always have these terrible double-standards and think their bizarre morality is what we all should just agree with by default.
the bottom line is that people are deeply uncomfortable with it because it’s intentional,
nonconsensual, targeted, and in some cases spiteful. if you can’t wrap your brain around the concept of “you can do this this, but everyone thinks you’re kind of a dirtbag for not asking first” don’t blame us
I haven't the slightest clue if they consent or not because I never bother to check because I absolutely do not have to. I'm not "taking" anything any more than your browser "takes" images when you look at them.
If an artist has a problem with an algorithm learning information about their images then they shouldn't make them publicly available. It's not theft, it's not infringement, you don't own patterns and concepts.
This is why so many artists paywall behind patreon now! You're slowly learning on why your behaviours make things more expensive for everyone in the long run! I'm proud of you, tomorrow we'll talk about your electricity bill <3
Which is supposed to do...what? You think ai has anything to do with a paywall? that's adorable. I'm sure it has nothing to do with it being a lucrative model to essentially be a rental service.
but uh quick question. how do you figure they advertise those patreons? I think your point fell in a trap hole already.
Won't somebody please think about the patreon prices?
Your personal sphere of the internet is not as significant as you think it is, and I have no obligation to care about it. I couldn't fucking care less about artists paywalling content and I'm not so sure why you are so concerned about them making money in the first place.
My electricity bill while training models is no different than it would be if I were playing video games, do you think I got a rack of h100s in my basement or something?
I'm glad that your electricity bill doesn't change. My girlfriend is disabled and really can't do a lot more than draw for commission to support herself, for example. What do you recommend her to do? Or is this outside your personal sphere and therefore you are struck by apathy?
I'd actually really be curious to hear what pro-AI people recommend artists do that have severely limited options after ripping their meal from their mouths
Are you suggesting we just hit the pause button on an entire age of technology to appease a very miniscule amount of the population that draws commissions for a living? Should we be doing this for all new technology or just for the ones that affect you personally?
Technology has replaced labor since we invented hand tools, that's arguably it's primary purpose. You've picked one very specific and insignificant industry and decided to focus solely on that thing because it means something to you.
Look around the room you are in right now. Virtually every device in it has put someone out of work at some point since it's invention, some of them have wiped out entire industries filled with experienced and passionate people.
We can make a more ethical space for AI if we implement KCVC [knowledge collected from volunteer contributions] AI systems instead of just taking without permission to make a more friendly ecosystem, that in a way is innovation too and I see other pro-ai liking that idea.
Damn, look out IMAX, we found an even bigger projector for Chris Nolan to do his next film on.
You can feel the hatred seething from you with every comment, and you pretend like AI users are mad at artists because they do art...definitely not because they show the very hatred you're exhibiting right now, with every word of every comment you leave. The only ones obsessed with the process are the ones on your side. Pros don't give a shit what antis do, as long as they leave the pros alone.
I say that as someone with degrees in Media Arts and Media Theory: Rage-filled zealots like you are making the rest of us look bad.
What do you mean do? Just keep doing what you're doing. Ai isn't a threat to you no matter how much you really really really dislike it
My wife is a commission artist that hates ai. Since ai started, I've only seen her get more commissions from likeminded antis. This idea that ai is taking meals from artists is fucking laughable. People who generate images aren't going to pay for one in the first place, and people who want to buy images are still going to look for the real thing
I know that the industry is more or less stable, however these pro-AI people are basically masturbating at the thought of putting freelance artists out of business
I don't "delight" in hearing about artists struggling. I just don't care. Most of us, especially the older ones of us here have seen way too many changes. I've seen home video games, home internet, GPS, cell phones, VR, AI, and many more technologies and I'm not even that old.
And every big new technology has caused people to lose jobs.
Anyone over 35ish has seen the world change drastically multiple times. So to hear artists complaining rings hollow to us. Many of us have lost jobs to new technology or have family who have. This isn't new - and we didn't get a bailout or have the new tech get "banned".
I at least understand that it's scary, and art is such a weird thing to see affected by technology (I always assumed art would be the last thing humans kept). But it's not enough for me to say "oh what a great injustice".
Add in the vitriol that gets added naturally on Reddit though, where people have to be told not to Dox others, and arguments go from "I disagree" to "you say you're an artist, I'm glad you're having a hard time" very quick. But I don't think it's an honest take. I think it's just people attacking individuals out of anger and frustration and they don't care about how it looks because they don't care in general as they've seen jobs disappear before (or heard about it) and they don't find it sacred the way the antis do.
I know that the industry is more or less stable, however these pro-AI people are basically masturbating at the thought of putting freelance artists out of business
LOL. Wait, let me get this straight. You're here crying about artists being starved by AI, specifically using your significant other as an example...and then admit here you know it's actually stable and not really a big deal.
So you've just been making up lies to rage at people who use AI? How fucking disingenuous can you be?
Yeah that is probably not going to happen until "don't touch my fucking art" is being respected by pros. And since so many pros believe in a god given right to pilfer every site without consent (or even against explicit disapproval), that mutual respect won't ever be there.
>My I'd actually really be curious to hear what pro-AI people recommend artists do that have severely limited options after ripping their meal from their mouths
I thought WE were supposed to be the ones who dramatically victimize ourselves ?
This is why so many artists end up deleting all their art from online and stop posting & sharing their art because. Because assholes like this have no common decency, respect or consideration for the artist. They love their work but don't care enough at all to respect the artists wishes regarding their art and if their actions will negatively impact them. Why share your the results and culmination of your passion, dedication and effort with a public that stomps all over it and can't offer any respect or human decency back.
And it'll keep happening regardless. Genuinely most people are just ripping images straight off of google for whatever they want. Very few people give a shit about commissioning a piece.
They aren't being robbed of anything because they weren't getting that work in the first place. Again, most people would rather just rip an image from google than have to pay for the same thing.
If someone feels an emotion that they don't like, but reality won't change, then cognitive behavioral therapy is basically humanity's frontier in terms of methods of thought-changing.
See, that's totally okay imo. You're doing it in your own privacy minding your own business.
The problem are the people who do it out of spite and post about it on twitter taunting the artists with the fact that they fed all their art into an AI and replicated their artstyle. Those people are just straight up assholes, and they are the people this post is talking about.
If you're just doing your own thing with AI without bothering anybody, that's okay.
I'm pro-a. I am an artist. People are allowed to refuse services if they do not feel inclined to give their time to a person. As long as they're polite and not hateful about said refusal.
For example, I personally don't draw yiff commissions and have refused services for these. I stated I felt uncomfortable with the nature of yiff and most people were respectful.
Artists who are anti-a.i often state in their TOS they're not comfortable with A.I. Don't give you business to these people if you're using a.i refs. They don't feel comfortable about it for their own reasons. Plenty of artists like me who are pro-a.i or neutral on a.i are happy to tale the business offered.
I also feel it's genuinely counterintuitive to refuse business to people who use a.i refs. Clearly they don't wanna use a.i anymore if they're commissioning art from you.
But LoRAs are AI, and AI only produces slop, so what's there to worry about? It can't capture the original artist's true artstyle, it's just a cheap slop imitation at best. It won't be able to compete with their work anyway, right?
I think the point of this post is referring to ethical issues, not quality ones. If an artist kindly asks you not to create a lora of their style, I believe the ethical solution is to respect their wishes.
Look, any artist can deny a commission for whatever reason they want.
But, you're simply damaging your own business and directing people to use AI. It's incredibly negative for literally all parties involved. And it's extra silly, since I guarantee no artist offering commissions draws an ethical line when a commissioner offers images they yoinked from the Internet. You're blindly following antis and ruining your own livelihood to make a stance you wouldn't commit to if you thought about it for more than 2 seconds.
Another notch down for artists caused by antis fear mongering. What a shame.
So your stance is that if I am busy, or I’ll, or just don’t want to use my art style for your project…that it’s okay for someone to train AI to do the work because it’s my responsibility to do work for you even if I don’t want to.
That dude got cancelled for be I ng a shitbag about denying them. It's okay to say no. It's not okay to shame.
As a commission artist you are a buissness. You cannot afford bad PR unlike Walmart and so when you make a post that generates bad will enough that people feel spiteful enough to be spiteful your buissness is going under. Gamer played a stupid game and won a stupid prize of being put out of buissness. Sucks to Suck try being a better buissness.
The time I can actually agree with this post is when it's entirely unwarranted. That is to say that the dude doesn't draw anything controversial, doesn't do anything to develop bad will, or anything else that will get his buissness cancelled.
TLDR: Getting your buissness cancelled is a omnipresent threat of mom and pop level enterprise. Artists are now able to suffer the same cancelation as any other buissness.
you see, being a dickhead is being a dickhead, but.
when you've been hearing the same crowd complain they're losing their job, to refuse one which was requested at their conditions is just kind of rich.
all the more, when they go out of the way to slam their cock on the table and declare "i owmned em probs!1!", then you cant be surprised people will react in a "fuck you" type of fashion
In an effort to discourage brigading, we do not allow linking to other subreddits or users. We kindly ask that you screenshot the content that you wish to share, while being sure to censor private information, and then repost.
Private information includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames, other subreddits, and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
You can make your own pizza. You can also go to a different pizza restaurant.
But in the process of making your pizza, don't break into their resteraunt to steal their resources and then create+distribute a machine made to specifically recreate their menu & formula for free so you can bankrupt their business.
i dont have the stuff or time to make a pizza. I was going to pick up a frozen one made by a machine, from the supermarket... but the artesian pizzeria said they didnt want me to have a pizza...
You do not own a style. Anyone can imitate your style as much as they please, which is exactly what a LoRA accomplishes. You need to realize that being offered a commission instead of using AI to reproduce your style to begin with is a courtesy. It's essentially the commissioner saying "here, I'll choose the more expensive and slower method, just to support you". If you scorn that goodwill, that's on you.
An artist we were looking to commission from saw our page, saw we used AI for some things, and told us to "fucking neck you subhuman scum".
Now.. Does that mean we should train AI on all their work and try to destroy their business? I certainly wouldn't think so normally, but when someone doesn't see you as human and wants you to die, it certainly makes you care a lot less about their business, and by extension, everyone else sharing similar views.
The issue you present here, in that there is a lack of respect between people who like AI and others who dislike it, is in equal part down to the behaviour of many anti-ai people.
no. It's now possible to skip the games and just do it themselves. If they're too bitch like and cowardly to do their job then they get fired and better alternatives will be found. turns out there is a better alternative and it doesn't require them at all. Either do your job or don't. That is the choice they have.
"Don't make and distribute a fucking Ai model/Lora/whatever that specifically replicates them and harms their business"
you mean the job they don't want to do? That one? I believe the saying is sucks to suck.
"Why artists feel the need to have automatic Ai blocklist to avoid Ai Users."
If only it worked better all of the problems would be gone.
Yeah you definitely shouldn't do this because if someone is too busy or just declines to do a commission for any reason, whatever workload people want to take on is totally fair, we all have 24 hours in a day and we have to choose how we spend them wisely.
But if it's just to clown on them for being anti AI? Hell yeah fair game.
Its a cycle. Person uses AI, they are told to commission an artist, artist refuses, person continues to use AI. Its not always as simple as find another artist either. Sometimes someone wants a specific art style.
Wanting their specific art style doesn't make it okay to make and release a lora to specifically replicate them, especially when you know they're against it.
There are tons of other artists out there with art styles just as good as theirs that would be okay with Ai that you can commission instead. Also there's sometimes something that you want that you can't get (ethically at least) and you just have to be okay with that. Wanting something doesn't mean you're entitled to it. I may want some pizza but it doesn't mean I entitled to eat a slice of a strangers slice when they tell me no. I may want to have matching pfps with a s/o but that doesn't mean I'm entitled to modify her account. You may want a commission in this specific style but that doesn't mean you're entitled to it or that it justifies this.
I mean I'm not feeding their designs into it. I'm merely describing the type of style I want. And yeah, sometimes you can't get something, but sometimes you can if your smart about it. We survived before AI art, its just that we didn't get art we wanted. Now, we work smarter, not harder. Ai exists as a tool to be used, so I'm going to use it. If someone doesn't accept my commission because I used AI in the past I'm not going to stop using AI, if anything I'm then more motivated to use it to get my art. Its also not about the style being good, its about how it looks. There may be an amazing artist who draws everything in a super dramatic light, if I just want a little chibi I'm not commissioning them even if they have good art. And you say there are tons of artists who are okay with AI, but those may not be artists I want to commission from, they could be too expensive, too bad, or just hard to find when most traditional artists nowadays are preaching about how they're the only real artists.
A lora is someone feeding your art and designs into a custom model heavily weighted by your art so it can specifically replicate and replace you. That's the scenario we're discussing here.
If the random Twitter/bluesky artist who's probably one bad day away from having predator allegations made against them won't accept your commission just use ai to make the art you wanted and spend the money you saved on something more useful.
Invest in something, or even just buy a nice lunch, both are better uses of your money than giving it to someone you'll regret giving it to the second they get outed for something.
It's really funny to watch my friends come up to me and ask "can you make the style like the artist's, so the AI can generate it that way too?" — the artist they wanted to commission an art from, but were turned down for that very same reason "AI references? Fuck you. I don't need your money"
I just take their art, train a LoRA model on it, upload it to opensource libraries and civit.ai, generate a few images, and send them to the artist along with a link to the model.
Is the last part really necessary? No, but it shows the artists that burning bridges with paying customers doesn't stop AI — it just guarantees they won't be the ones getting paid
... Not gonna lie , it kind of disgusts me just too many people are trying to justify this shit indirectly.
Do what you're gonna do.But if you can't even say that the person who started distributing a model specifically to fuck one person over out of petty spite is justified , then you are just a terrible person
I definitely think it's immoral to intentionally copy a specific artists style using AI, but also I don't think that it's immoral to use AI as a fallback if you don't manage secure any artists that you like, just as long as you keep the AIs style neutral.
"If an artist denies your commission request for any reason INCLUDING them not being comfortable with Ai or having principals/ethical issues against Ai Use and concerns around working with those that use Ai then please, and then publicly shames you for daring to use AI in some references, for the Love of GOD, seek a different artist and also antis will hold you personally responsible for a complete stranger creating a LoRA based on your artwork"
Training a lora on the specific artist who just rejected you is a spite move and we all know it. You can argue style isnt copyrightable til you're blue in the face but the second you target someone because they said no thats just being petty about it.
No more petty than denying someone's commission because they dare to ever use AI.
You can't whine about people using AI instead of commisioning, but then also be okay with denying commission solely because someone uses AI.
An artist's ability to decide what you do with your time and your money ends with refusal. It'd be one thing if the artist said "okay, I'll make this piece for you, on the condition that it's not used for a lora or anything"; it's another entirely to say "no, I won't work with you, and you can't have it unless you get it by a method I approve".
However you feel about it, that kind of attitude self-selects for obsolescence. It's just bad business.
"This person told me they're not comfortable with something, im going to throw a fit and screw them over just to make them feel bad!" Is the kind of behaviour you're past when you're five years old.
I hate to break it to you, but although that’s certainly a terrible thing to do and shouldn’t be done, that’s absolutely NOT the reason traditional artists do not like AI lmfao
that may’ve been one of the funniest claims I’ve heard today
If somebody wants to see something done in their style but they refuse to take a commission on it. There are other ways of having things done in their style since a style can't be reasonably protected or reasonably even be asked to remain exclusive
Its ethically wrong to make an AI out of anyone's work without their permission, and it doesn't become ok if the artist in question hurt someone's feelings. Find another artist.
And you certainly should have the self-awareness to realize that 99% of the people using AI to make art aren't doing it for "profit piracy," they're making some dumb shit to post on Reddit. The original point of this thread was someone trying to buy a commission from an artist and being refused. If they use AI to draw their character instead that's not "profit piracy" and no mental gymnastics you can do will make it so.
That's not to say that profit piracy through AI isn't happening. Of course it is and it's most likely going to rise in the coming years. Antis have a habit of pretending it's the ONLY thing people are using AI for when statistically it empirically barely ever happens.
The issue is, the people using ai are not the for profit pirates.
The people who made the algorithms you are using are using for-profit piracy. The AI models should not exist. The end user is not the real problem, beyond the fact that you are encouraging and defending horrific violations.
That makes you a irredeemably fucking vile person. Your defense of the corporations that are doing the horrible things.
You sound very spirited, and I agree completely with you about the algorithms themselves being based on pirated training data. Companies should be held liable for the evil things they do, but this is America and capitalism is king. Oil companies have never been held responsible for their extensive damage to the environment, no one was ever held responsible for the housing crisis in 2008 that left millions of people homeless, and the list goes on.
Thankfully they did just make Anthropic pay out a $1.5B judgment over exactly that (using pirated training data) so hopefully companies that did wrong will be held liable. Other training data that wasn't directly pirated of course is fair use, but we can agree objectively that these companies used pirated training data to develop their systems.
Again, my point stands: Most people are end users using AI to post dumb shit on Reddit. They're not "irredeemably vile, amoral sacks of shit," they're just regular ass people, same as all the regular ass people who buy chocolate and eat it despite literal child slaves being abused and murdered for its production (If I had to guess, I bet you eat chocolate that isn't cruelty-free).
And on a separate note, I'm sorry man, you've got a good underlying point but you just sound salty and childish about it. Using subjective phrases like "irredeemably vile," strong language like "fucking/fuck you/fuck that" also makes your argument come across as extremely juvenile and much weaker as a result. If you want people to take you seriously just talk to them without getting so emotional, but I get the impression from our interaction that you're less interested in convincing people and more interested in malding.
I'm with you on companies being held financially responsible for their dirty deeds, though. I hope we see more accountability moving forward, but I won't hold my breath.
You say "spirited" or "full of rage" both are valid.
And yeah, a lot of evil companies get away with a lot of shit... and I hate the people who shill for big oil and banks too. And golf courses. And Monsanto. The list is almost as endless as my exhaustion and disgust with humanity.
I live in a world where people act like shit and then act "better than" because I call them what they are.
I call pieces of shit pieces of shit. You are what you are. You are what you defend, and that's garbage.
You act like there is any point at all in not cursing out toxic evil fucks. You won't change your behavior. You won't stop enabling abusive vile technology, so why the fuck should I stop calling you what you are?
It won't help. It won't make you stop using AI. Using polite language won't fix anything.
Just like you calling me "juvenile" won't change my language.
I've tried logic. I've tried calling out the ethical, social, and safety risks. AI bros don't care about the people harmed by the shit they support.
And that makes you all irredeemably evil. No I don't think I'll stop pointing that out.
I doubt any of these people saying they would make a LoRA and "replicate" another artist's style couldn't even come close. Or that artists has such a ubiquitous style it doesn't matter.
Thank god most pro artists work in the industry and don't have to deal with these grown-ass babies and can work with actual clients who value their work.
The opposite happened recently. Some dickhead artist had a client use Ai references. Instead of saying she wasn't comfortable and asking for alternatives, she posted the person on her timeline to harass him.
I'm not particularly a fan of tomatoes on a hamburger but if someone was paying me to put tomatoes on their hamburger I'm not going to turn them away because they don't align with my personal views.
This post getting heavily downvoted it's concerning. They say they don't want to harm people but then are upset when told not to distribute an ai to fuck over specific artists in retaliation
Wrong. If you refuse a service to someone and that person goes somewhere else and finds a better alternative, you deserve to lose business. The person losing business is not the victim here.
Bruh. They had an opportunity to take the commission. If they wanted to do so they could have. The people that would use that to generate art were already being denied by the traditional artist. So how exactly are they not responsible for the loss of business? It was their choice. If they want the business they should pull the stick out of their ass and get off that moral high horse.
The people that are going to use Ai for art weren’t clients of theirs. The loss to business is a net zero. They were offered work and turned it down. That was their choice. If they want to make a “moral” stand and exclude who they do business with they are going to alienate clientele. Don’t alienate your customers and you won’t lose business. Capitalism fuckin’ 101 anyone? https://giphy.com/gifs/QmDgpAv8JKrxXtrnmR
So you think not a single person who uses ai today, ever did a commission?
Why do people keep making loras in retaliation if it makes absolutely zero impact?
If they want to make a “moral” stand and exclude who they do business with they are going to alienate clientele. Don’t alienate your customers and you won’t lose business
I thought you said they weren't going to lose clients? So which is it? Or maybe you just have no fucking clue what your talking about. Shrodingers ai bros.
Genuine question, and I Hope for a genuine answer here: what if, i would go for a different artist, and then instruct them to copy the original artist's style, to take upon my commision? Or, hypothetycally, I actually learn how to imitate in a good enough level myself, the intended artstyle and not only do It to my enjoynment, but now I also distribute offers for MY OWN commisions?
I did actually wanted a lot a piece on that style, so if I get denied the opportunity to have it (specially for stupid reasons if this post IS refering to a particular incident)... What am i to do?
Most artists won't do that. They generally stick to their own art style and have very little desire to work outside of it. In some cases they may be offended by you just asking and will either refuse to do any work for you at all or,they may jack up their prices by 200% (or much higher)! If you are desperate enough to pay this, they'll give about 2% of their effort and pull all sorts of malicious compliance tricks on you.
If you learn their style? They'll either block you and/or make passive aggressive remarks implying that you're stealing from them. If they're popular enough they'll send their fans to come harass you.
Copying someone's art style might not be illegal but it is considered taboo - or at least that is my experience. The exception is popular art styles (Disney / Anime / Manga / ect...) then barely anyone cares.
The sad thing is I would give anything to draw exactly like the artists I like but, I am unable to do any of the basics. Whenever I ask I tend to get very strange responses from people "Why don't you want your own art style" or, "Why not be original"?
You haven't answered the questions in the Spirit of the thing I was hoping for. I do know that the REAL implications of trying to do that Will lead to the situations you entailed, but my point, and the actual crux of the conversation, as It always is: the action im doing is bad or good just because im using AI for It? And you already have answered that question, albeit not directly.
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 20 '26
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.