I hope A.I keeps advancing and forces a universal income.
By - No-Buyer-3509
I hope A.I keeps advancing and forces a universal income.
Man the optimism you must have for that kind of a statement. The oligrachs would never give up control and slavery. They force us into servitude by the threat of homelessness and starvation. Fat chance in hell they'd ever let UBI pass. You must slave away until you die under capitalism. UBI and having things like public housing and healthcare get in the way of profits.
Less time working and more time living means more chances for pesky things like unions and socialism to take hold. The capitalists know this which is why capitalism is a death cult. They literally will work the system until it's dead and fascism emerges. We are literally seeing this now with covid. Remember how many politicans and businesses basically told people to die for their profits? Or how in america we basically ignore covid as if it's gone when so many people are still dying from it? Or shit, look at the rise of fascism in america.
We are already to a breaking point. Most people don't realize we are living under the shift RIGHT now. I mean climate change is literally going to wipe out humanity due to capitalism. It won't stop until everyone is dead.
Everyone is scared of the AI when in reality they need to be deathly afraid of those that are in control of it.
There is some hope for us plebians though. Meta leaked a LLM model in March I think it was. Since then the open source community has revolutionized it to an almost incomprehensible degree. Open-source LLMs are now competitive with ChatGPT (at least GPT 3.5, not sure about 4) and can be created at a much lower cost.
[Google had some internal documents that got leaked in which they have the revelation that open-source AI is going to overtake them if they do not start working with the open-source community. It's actually a wild read and brings a lot of hope for a future where AI isn't controlled by the top 1%.](https://www.semianalysis.com/p/google-we-have-no-moat-and-neither)
Also, UBI seems almost like a necessity with advanced enough AI, even if just the 1% are in control of it. Once AI is good enough to take over most jobs, people will be replaced. It doesn't make sense for a business owner to pay an hourly rate for labor when they could just buy an AI robot for a 1-time fee and work it for the life of the business. Once enough of that starts happening and most people are out of work there will be no one left with enough income to spend money on frivolous things. If it ever gets to that extreme of a situation capital owners will probably be part of the group pushing for UBI, so more people can spend money on their products.
Why not just go hang out in r/conspiracy if you're going to say insane shit like this.
So anyway, we started blasting
This guys correct. Right now we’re fighting off authoritarianism because capitalism is becoming a glaring failure to people 40 and under
>This guys correct. Right now we’re fighting off authoritarianism because capitalism is becoming a glaring failure to people 40 and under
Thank you for saying this. I wish more people would engage with comments like this. I get the feeling that people tend to think that this is some alarmist bullshit **or** the thought of confronting that reality secrets terrifies some people, but everything you’re saying is true.
It is alarmist bullshit.
These arguments rely entirely on fear and uncertainty to trick well meaning people into believing baseless horseshit.
There's no way you're real and not some kind of bot account
It really does blow my mind how people think that those in power will not somehow leverage everything (including universal income) for their benefit. So sad how ignorant people can be. But hey they'll post how a town who did this somehow did okay and think that proves their point 100%.
…so uh, what kinda games do you like?
It’s so maddening that people don’t see this
UBI is the natural result of increased automation. It won’t mean that the class war will end, but you won’t be starving in the street either lol.
They will happily let us starve. These are the same kinds of assholes who think killing trans people will solve their problems.
They also sent stimulus checks when people couldn’t work. When automation creates an unemployment rate that’s like 60%, they just aren’t going to let you all die lol. The country couldn’t function in that scenario. I understand that doomer predictions are good for upvotes, but people have always believed that the world is about to end. It’s human nature.
??? People are already starving in the street as we speak.....
In the event of a 70% unemployment rate, which is fast approaching, it’s your belief that all of you will just die? You believe that the country could survive in such a scenario? You’re not thinking this through.
"they're going to let us starve" doesn't mean everybody is going to drop dead. That's like, Ben Shapiro level pedantry. There are plenty of other examples of how it will shake out. Look at any favella city in any country with extreme wealth disparity. Expect more of that.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>There is no doubt that law enforcement should be heavily scrutinizing the membership and administration of mosques.
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: gay marriage, dumb takes, novel, healthcare, etc.)
[^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Thank you for your logic and reason.
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: sex, gay marriage, history, novel, etc.)
[^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
If you believe that 60-70% of Americans would live like that, I’m not sure what to tell you. In any case, I’m not playing the downvote game with you. Have a nice life!
>I mean climate change is literally going to wipe out humanity due to capitalism. It won't stop until everyone is dead.
Jesus christ, imagine being this unhinged.
Please get help bro, this can't be healthy.
> I don't think oligarchs exist or that money has influence in politics.
You honestly, in your heart of hearts, believe that money doesn't have influence in politics? In a world of lobbyists, massive spending in campaigns of all sizes, and people who vote based on how often they see a name on a yard sign.
Jesus fuck. People this idiotic exist.
What an absolute shite take.
Ah you are a neoliberal that explain it. To you exploitation is a feature of capitalism not a bad thing. You'd literally sell your own mother out if it made you a profit.
How you can look anyone in the eye and say oligarchs dont exist. We literally have mega corps that break the law and aren't held accountable. Literally breaking the law to oligarchs is a fine. Any law that is a fine is not a law, it's a tax on the poor.
And they gave money to BUSINESSES. Not the working class. They gave it to the people who already had money. Not the people who needed it. I also find it funny you say politicans did not tell us to die for the economy when there were literally headlines of a politican doing just exactly that. Texas lt govner to be exact
And as for the white supremacy not being a thing in america...buddy, the fucking FEDS released a paper in the early 2000s talking about how bad it is and how bad it will be. It's 20 years later and things have only changed for the worse.
There is literally already a high death toll for deaths from climate change and yet you are plugging your eyes and ears and pretending like it doesn't matter or only effects a few people.
But hey, like a typical neoliberal you will take one look at this evidence and dismiss it because you LIKE the lie the system is selling you. If I had to guess you are someone middle class or even upper class who thinks the system is fine because it works for YOU.
Exactly. Thank you for calling out unironic schizo posts
AI will be used as managers to whip the working class into slavery. You need to argue with chatgpt for a .20 raise before it lays you off for taking too many lunches.
AI can advance all it wants, but there's always a need to pay people piss to do jobs robot's can't do yet
At this point we're on track to humans regulated to crappy physical labor jobs and AI getting to do all the fun stuff.
You may have noticed that it's far easier and cheaper to tell unemployed people to fend for themselves.
Don't let the doomers get you down. AI has just as much ability to be used as a force for good as ill.
It’ll advance until we work for it to fuel it’s demands
This is the ideal result
The likely result is that the capitalist class uses it to put their boots even harder on the neck of the working class
Remember inside of every oligarch boot though is soft and chewy center, like a tootsie pop. We just need to channel our Mr Owl
Kinda delusional optimism tbh, universal income is already achievable, but CEOs with their 10000000000s of dollars (PER CEO!) have enough power in this country to keep people poor.
realistic take: AI takes all the creative jobs (art, writing, science maybe?), people are forced into drudgery and servitude (self driving, cashier jobs are going away BTW, but what isn't-- cleaning, gardening and mining!) because creating an AI for $500000 to do those tasks is too much money for the wealthy to do it -- just get the poors to do it for $1000!
I sincerely question who on earth you think is going to pay for everyone to receive an income for not doing anything…
We all do. We just make sure ALL of us pay including the 4 people that hold more wealth then 8 billion. Stop letting the rich put the boot on you. You work harder then they ever had in their life.
We need to let go of concepts like "you have to work to live".
Hahaha. That’s not how capitalism works. More like universal suffering for all but the elite.
Yes. Just like how all the other amazing technical advancements have benefited the working class...lol. This is an inherent problem with capitalism. Advancement doesn't typically help most people. It only makes rich people even more rich.
That’s not what will happen lmao.
God, I really hope some of these comments aren’t an indicator of the overall opinion on this shit. Boggles the mind that people can’t understand the simple concept of people losing work because some A.I can make an uninspired, lazy ass version with a click of a button and a few refreshes until you get something you’re okay with.
All good until A.I starts coming for your jobs I guess. Really hope we start pushing against this in all areas. I know it’s a big sticking point for the writers strike right now.
AI can also be a powerful tool. I’m a professional illustrator and use AI art generation for things like generating multiple pose and photo references, concepting layouts and ideas, color palettes, simple abstract backgrounds, textures etc. I feel like every time I use it I find a new potential use that speeds up my production time and helps me make more money.
I get artists are scared of it, but if you adopt it into your workflow it could help you immensely speed things up and create better work! I’m personally not afraid of being replaced by an AI art generator in the least. In fact I’m excited about how it’s helping me make more money quicker than ever before.
Yeah, the thing is that these AI tools are really being promoted wrong. It's too much "it does all the work for you" and not enough "it does a lot of the hard parts for you".
I'm a programmer and I also like to do Photoshop art. I've started using AI a lot in both and I'm not worried AI is going to replace humans in either (with maybe a few exceptions).
What they're great at is turning "creation" into "fixing". Like, instead of writing some tedious script to automate something, I can spend that time debugging what chatGPT wrote and get there a lot faster. Or have it take a kludgy photoshop and make it look coherent.
But where they are right now is that it is slightly better than explaining what you want to someone else in an email and expecting them to send you back a perfect result. It just almost never happens first try. And there is a limit to how good that can ever get without a straight up brain-computer interface. If you want exactly what's in your head, it's always going to be more accurate to just do it yourself.
They are incredibly powerful tools, but they're just tools. You still need humans to operate tools. But businesses are being sold on them being more than that, and that is what is going to cost jobs and ruin lives, not the tools themselves.
The thing is, that's where we are right now. A few months ago this stuff wasn't even available to the public, and now we have access to the very first single-cylinder engine. Give it a few years and we'll have V8s.
Google's Deep Dream came out almost 15 years ago, this has been decades of development. The last few months have been exponential growth to be sure, but it's not quite that recent. There is definitely a lot of improvement coming soon, too.
But the limitations I'm talking about aren't strictly technical. It's more about trying to describe in language what you want and getting a good result back. That will always be a challenge whether the listener is human or digital.
If you don't care about details, the AI is great. Like, I can ask for a picture of a woman and get one back no problem. But if I want a picture of my mom in high school, then I need to either have a reference image or be able to draw her close enough for reference. It's the same whether an AI or a professional artist. But right now, I'm more likely to get a closer result describing her to a human. And I'd be best served drawing it myself. That's not a technology problem.
And there are really cool tools in development that help that a lot. Improvements in inpainting, ControlNet, OpenScribble and more let you get much more accurate results and fix small parts of images instead of regenerating the whole thing. But those tools - even in the future - will still require you to know how to work them, be able to write good prompts, and take time to use.
I'm talking about diffusion models there, but the same is pretty true with LLMs. I think we'll see more growth and automation there, but right now they are so unreliable because they have no way to express confidence. Even if they make one error in ten thousand, that could be thousands a day for many potential applications. And they currently make way more than that. They'll get much better, but anyone who has money riding on what they do will be wise to keep a human in the process for at least another few years.
Same type of people who were afraid of industrial revolution, and look how that turned out. People are always afraid of progress.
Then spend your energy on helping those people or getting legislation passed that helps them. Trying to stifle innovation won't stop it whatsoever and also won't help the struggling families that lose their jobs today.
It's coming and you can choose to be afraid of it, or choose to embrace it and adapt.
The Industrial Revolution improved quality of life over all, but it also gave us climate change. Ships capable of crossing oceans gave us international trade, but also colonization and slavery. Cars made travel easier but ruined walkable cities and gave us generations of lead-addled people. The long term cost of technological progress isn’t a small thing.
AI is coming for everyone’s job regardless of how much we push against it.
Instead of pushing against inevitable progress, we should realize its inevitability and push for society to catch up.
But how “inspired” does a duke nukem remaster cover need to be at this point?
Oh noes, the artist used a TOOL. What's next, he will pick up a PAINT BRUSH??
It doesn't. And nobody cares, but gamers hate change and love to find the next thing to be angry about. Enter: AI.
Ya, all of a sudden people care about the direction the franchise has been going the last few years.
You're saying that like millions of jobs haven't already became redundant this century due to technological advances. Things change but nothing gets completely destroyed.
For real. Fucking *please* automate my job. The thing is that everyone criticizing AI is stuck on the assumption that you need to earn the right to exist. We live in the greatest period of excess in human history. Even the mega rich benefit from people not starving, so some kind of basic income honestly makes sense.
People already are starving. There are huge, HUGE amounts of homeless people. Just because you don't see it in your life every day doesn't mean it isn't already a problem.
So those of us that already see this find it extremely laughable that anyone is suddenly going to push for UBI. They won't do a damn thing until it's at their doorsteps and the rich are the ones owning the AI companies so it won't be a problem for them ever
I love the defeatist attitude. Of course people are already starving, who are you lecturing? It's just ridiculous to think that stopping AI is an easier battle than social safety net reform. People on UBI are customers and less likely to resort to crime. This is a much easier case to make than convincing the entire tech industry to make less money.
No amount of pushing against AI will stop it being developed. Best get a job that is not likely to be binned.
that's some ass advice. Eventually AI could take -EVERY- Job. There is not a job out there that couldn't be done by a sophisticated enough algorithm. The only job that is safe is CEO because those are the oligarchs who control everything.
I wonder how money works when every single thing is automated including the maintenance of the automation. What exactly do humans even do at that point. With full automation, everything could essentially be made for free since the sentient robot slaves don't need money. The only limiting factor is amount of natural resources. I'm too dumb to even begin to comprehend how this would work.
you spend too much time online
“On a long enough time line, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.”
-- Chuck Palahniuk
I am not talking eventually. I am speaking proximally, as in it has tangible effects very soon.
That pic is 70% good. Whoever created it couldn't be bothered to digitally paint over all the errors. Without the obvious errors, people wouldn't even know it's AI art
A.I. Isn't a problem. If we would live in a rational logical world, we would use A.I. and automation to free ourselves from monotonous labor, so we could focus on improvement, progress and exploration of the unknown. But we live in a stupid world that was conceived by supposedly sentient and intelligent beings. The world built around the worst traits of ours, the world in which greed is the highest virtue and profit is the only goal. Capitalism is the root of the problems, fighting anything else is fighting symptoms instead of the cause of disease. Until capitalism persists capitalists will always find new ways to extract value from us, if not AI then something else will be used.
I welcome AI to take over forklift operations and every other task under the sun.
If we had UBI then I'd be all for it. As of now, people being out of a job just means more starving and suffering. We have a LOT of shit to fix before we start replacing everyone with computers.
And that's not even mentioning the fallacy of thinking that AI art has *any* artistic merit, since it by nature can only regurgitate elements of existing art and has no purpose or meaning.
I think we’re dangerously close to the point where regular people will just start starving to death and dying because they can’t find a job they’re qualified for to make money to pay for food and shelter, and the general public will just accept it as “oh well it happens I guess”. Homelessness is already massively booming across the entire country.
Yup, I've already experienced first-hand the amount of people who will genuinely say that poor and homeless people are just lazy and entitled. It's gonna take some *drastic* change before the majority of the voting population realizes the reality of the situation.
I agree AI art is pretty shit however as it stands most governments are reactive and not proactive we will not get UBI or change in our society till we have radical things change it. We could had people working remotely years ago it wasn’t till Covid that now remote work is quite common, even after lockdowns and things being open again.
Well, I certainly wish I shared that optimism. If we ever get *any* form of UBI, let alone a thriving and functional, the sheer amount of people that will suffer and die is just too much to bear. Realistically, the evolution of AI won't lead to that, just a further economic disparity. It's not until that disparity becomes so extreme that it leads to constant riots or revolution that something will change that *doesn't* benefit the top 1%
I wasn’t being optimistic it will absolutely suck. Your last lines there are pretty much what happens unless more equitable systems crop up. However as it stands currently without ai and robotics taking our jobs. A majority all go to work to barely get by. The disparity is widening and been on track to become unsustainable without AI. AI to me feels like the thing that speeds it up to totally tip the scale over to one side. I’m tired of watching the economy slowly shift the wealth let’s just get it over with so we can all see it clearly for what it is. A rigged system.
I can respect that. At least with things accelerating faster it'd make it harder to deny. Of course people still will, because delusion is a fucking commodity now, but I do agree with you that a more extreme transition is certainly harder to refute
Hard to deny an empty stomach and homelessness.
It's a duke nukem cover. It does not need to be fancy, and they'd likely end up paying someone almost nothing for it.
Also, seriously? We're going with the "it costs jobs" argument? You do realize there are thousands of people if not more who work on this AI, right? It arguably creates jobs.
Your argument inherently implies that the value of human life is derived from its ability to perform labor.
If you've ever done something you love for fun, and then tried to do it professionally, you'd know it usually ruins the fun, and you can grow to dislike things you once loved.
Society is going to go through a major stage of sociocultural evolution, and it doesn't need to be a bad thing. Like all change, it will be painful at first, but like all things that pain will come to pass. If we can evolve into a society where people are free to pursue their passions instead of a life of labor for the status quo of the elite, that will be a very good thing for mankind.
How do you think people felt when computers made it so that what once took 10 people, suddenly it only took 1? People resisted learning computers too. Computers replaced existing jobs. Few today would look back and say, "I wish we'd banned computers." AI is a tool, it still requires a user. A tool cannot produce quality products by its lonesome. A tool cannot produce quality products in the hands of an inexperienced user.
The writers strike is a great example of a misinformed and conservative reaction to a new tool. If a company created a show entirely written by an AI, that show would be awful. It would not be successful at all, because an AI cannot write at that level currently (we can talk about the future at the end of this rant). Instead an AI could be effectively used in some of these ways:
-Brainstorming plot ideas
-Generating lists of names for fictitious things
-Summarizing existing scripts into story boards
-Creating lists of data extrapolated from scripts (lists of characters, locations, etc)
-Shortening scripts, getting ideas for what to omit, getting feedback on specific parts of a script
These are all things that AI does FOR writers. Yes, this means that maybe instead of a room of 10 writers, we will need a room of 2 if they are using AI. This also means (if only capitalism actually worked this way) there would be more budget to pay those writers higher.
I am a programmer and already by your standards, "it's coming for my job". I am not afraid though. I already use AI to increase my own productivity. That productivity boost opens tons of doors for me. I can finish my own projects much faster. I can create things that may have been too big for one programmer to be possible in the past. I also know based on this, that only a programmer could use AI to write a program. Why? Because AI is often confidently wrong or misunderstands. It takes someone who can understand and read code to be able to edit and use the code it outputs. It also requires someone who knows how to speak about programming to instruct it effectively.
Of course though, you can argue that AI will get so good that all of my arguments will no longer be valid, but that argument is just a what ifism at this point. A huge limiting factor for the output of AI is the specificity of our input. The human language, as we use it today, is not sufficient for communicating with the specificity to turn what we imagine into words that will result in the output of that exact imagined idea. Maybe one day we will control AI with our brains, but there again proves my point, that human use of the tool is required for the creation of quality and specific products.
If anyone wants job security, start learning to use AI now to become better at what you do. Stop worrying about the infinite possibilities of what might happen in the future, based on tech and scenarios that don't exist yet, because nobody truly knows how far AI will advance, or how society will cope with that. It could go almost anyway except away.
While I agree with you on principle, in this specific case they *did* pay someone for the art, and the person they commissioned used AI instead of actually doing the job they were hired to do. Sounds more like a grift by the artist than an attempt by the devs to be cheap, lazy, or replace someone's job with AI.
Why does it mater what tool someone uses to get the job done? Or are we back in highschool and you are the teacher saying we won't always have a calculator in our pocket.
Well, they were semi-right. I don't just have a calculator, I have to god dam sum total knowledge of humanity in my pocket.
That's how progress works, you can't just stop it.
AI is just another tool. Those who adapt to use it will put shine those who don't or who refuse to.
The writers are being stupid. AI can be used to help their job (like faster brainstorming).
> some A.I can make an uninspired, lazy ass version with a click of a button and a few refreshes until you get something you’re okay with
most human made art is lazy uninspired trash too. What's the difference honestly
Looks cool tho
Remember when AI was going to automate all the bullshit jobs so humans could spend their time on more fulfilling pursuits like art?
Capitalists said "fuck that"
Fuck AI art.
> Remember when AI was going to automate all the bullshit jobs so humans could spend their time on more fulfilling pursuits like art?
I mean, work is still being done to do that.
Work on "AI" tech isn't some monolithic blob plodding along from one application to another.
Wrong. Turns out automating meat-space is really hard. Can't have a robot ram into a wall 1000 times before it leaves to go right instead of left.
I work every day on automating the dirty and hard stuff. But there are not enough automation engineers to do the work. So if you really want to help, learn some programming like Ladder Logic, hope over to /r/PLC and send me a resume. We could use the help.
I am an artist. I have zero desire to abruptly alter the course of my entire life and become a programmer because you think it's some bulletproof gotcha.
You are in a low skill field. If AI researchers could have chosen what to first replace, it wouldn’t have been art. Art just so happened to be the easiest.
It's so bizarre that I have to remind people that art made by humans has intrinsic spiritual value to civilization and the human experience. There is more to the world than dollar signs.
Frankly, I don't know what point you're trying to make. It seems like you just wanted to get a personal jab in.
>intrinsic spiritual value
Spiritual means more than crystal woo woo bullshit. It's just relating to the human condition on an emotional level instead of a logistical one.
That art looks great to me. It’s classic duke in hi res, literally if some artist spent a week making it, what would people criticize about it? Just because art is made by ai doesn’t mean it’s automatically bad. What about this art is “bad”
Agreed I think it looks awesome aside from the couple of minor flaws that should have been fixed up.
but as always...
some one took my buggy mentality state. with new tech
Seems like a waste to be bothered by this. AI is going to be replacing so much more than this in the coming years since it’ll save companies and publishers money.
Yeah, fuck whoever gets less work because of it. As long as your average person is happy with janky AI creations it's all good. Suits need another yacht.
He's not saying fuck anyone. It's a sad fact. AI will 100% become more prominent in our society. And probably at a rapid pace.
And just like with other technologies, ppl will be replaced. Maybe at an even greater rate. This AI stuff is a huge point in human history.
This has been going on forever. Automation always leads to a loss of jobs, and usually for the people who need those jobs the most. Just look at self check out lanes in grocery stores. No one cares until it happens to a job or hobby that directly relates to their interest, and as long as it's convenient for everyone else there will be so few people to oppose it that it's a non-issue.
I’m sure people said the same thing about the printing press and using robots instead of humans on assembly lines. It’s called automation and it’s not inherently bad.
AI will never fully replace artists either. If you want something very specific, like a specific pose or something, you’ll still want an artist. And even if you get a near perfect AI image, if you want to add or change something you’ll still need an artist.
EDIT: lmao they blocked me so i can’t respond to this thread…
You're hard coping if you think artists won't be fully replaced by an AI someday.
Your hard coping if you ever think an AI will replace something that requires that level of nuance
Someday you won't be able to tell the difference and will be replacing most jobs. It's the reality of AI that you just have to accept.
"I can see the future, and i know that they will replace everyone.
IDK. Its reality. just accept it and deal with it. its life. AI is the future.
Whats AI? I dont know, i saw an "AI" produce an image and a large language model that has no clue what its saying and assumed that they would take over the world. \**shrug*\*. Its reality. Get over it."
Wdym how? Look how computers changed the world. If you don't see how AI will be changing the world, you need to read more about it then. And yes it will replace most jobs.
>Look how computers changed the world
if by"look at how computers changed the world"you mean"look at how much more accessible basically every field in the world is with computers involved", then sure.
Nobody suggested AI wont change the world. Imagine goalposting shifting this hard. "*You're hard coping if you think artists won't be fully replaced by an AI someday."* this is what you said. No, it will not "replace most jobs" in the same way computers did not "replace most jobs" despite being a monumentally more useful invention.
you want to let people know if you actually know what you are talking about?
What is AI? Tell me that.
Sorry you can't fathom how your job as a burger flipper can't be done by a robot. You realize advancements in technology have already constantly replace jobs? Just look at the car industry with the assembly lines. AI is the next big jump and its already showing its guaranteed potential by already making art way faster and better than most artists (like I've said already). A give it a year or two and you won't be able to tell the difference. Maybe even less time than that. Hopefully you educate yourself better so I don't have explain this like I'm explaining it to a five year old.
It's a societal problem. AI should be seen as a very very good thing so we humans can focus on human things instead of being wage slaves.
Human things like writing and art.
AI is not preventing you from doing those. AI can make those easier for more people to do. Why is that a problem?
Yes, because people are really hankering to make a cover for duke nukem, and there are no other avenues for art in video game design.
Also, who cares? The image looks nice and serves a purpose. Are we assuming that the studio isn't AI upscaling any assets or textures? Will we not want the game if someone didn't painstakingly generate every single asset by hand? Honestly, AI - outside of taking jobs off the market - is a savior for the workforce because it means that people won't have to do large loads of tedious and mind numbing work.
The hands and feet are pretty janky though, but give ai time and it’ll catch up
People here dont seem bothered by ai art, but I don’t think you guys realize what the implications are for humanity going forward
Art was previously thought to be untouchable by machines, and considered difficult for computers to perform. So if this is what they are able to do now, imagine what jobs they’ll be taking over next?
We’ll be seeing ai replace almost anything: lawyers, cashiers, musicians, chefs, writers, landlords.
That writer’s strike that is currently going on btw, one of their demands is a guarantee that they won’t be replaced with ai.
The jobs that will be safe are probably maintenance related; as for all those other jobs, they’ll probably be there at a reduced capacity. So top tier artsts in this case for example, are safe *but* will begin to lose their negotiating power since more people will be available to do those few select jobs.
And so it begins; as the middle class continues to die out, it will only accelerate as the execs in power no longer need as much labor going forward.
My hope for art, as a concept artist myself, is that the public will consume ai assisted content, but might also have a hankering for *human* made content that is a little more adventurous, like how sometimes you want Kfc, but on Saturday you’re wanting that porterhouse steak at the local steakhouse. On the bright side, maybe we’ll see more projects with original ideas as they try harder to peel away from derivatively generated content
*All* AI art is comprised of stolen assets from other artworks found on the Internet. The only way to create an art-generation AI that isn't stealing is to train it entirely on one persons' artwork with their explicit permission.
This isn't a replacement for human work nor can it be. The hands-and-feet issue is a symptom, but the root cause isn't solved. The cause is that the source materials aren't uniform in style (since they're stolen) so the AI generation has to fudge things. This is part of how AI generation *works* and can't be simply adjusted or trained for.
Give it five years and the things we call AI today will be laughed at. Just remember the golden rule of computing: Garbage In, Garbage Out.
Fingers crossed! Honestly i’m hoping this takes the NFT route and implodes in a year’s time, and I’m just over-anxious about it
Let's put it this way.
If trainable AI is so good for art generation, then why haven't we used it to train a diswashing robot?
Robotic limbs are currently more expensive than paying a college student minimum wage
The kind of AI you would need to wash dishes would basically be a general-purpose AI. The difference between AI working with a 2-dimensional grid of pixels and actually interacting in real-time with the physical world is orders of magnitudes of complexity. It would be much much more feasible to make a normal robot wash dishes, and we don't do that because it's prohibitively expensive.
I hate to break it to you artists, but AI art is only going to become more and more common, and that's something we should celebrate. It opens the door to so many opportunities for people that aren't artistically gifted.
1: I am not an artist, I am a computer programmer. My perspective comes from an understanding of how AI is created and its operational parameters.
2: A dishwashing AI would not be general purpose at all, it would be quite narrow and possibly tuned to a preselected collection of specifically-sized dishes (for both ease of implementation *and* consumer experience conformity). The concept of general-purpose robotics comes from the "humanoid robot" idea, which has already been proven to be uneconomical for nearly all jobs compared to task-specific robotic devices.
3: The technobabble you spout about a grid of pixels versus a three dimensional object is just that: technobabble. From a software perspective, it is simply an additional computational dimension. This is all well-established computing for which standard libraries have been in use for many years, actually; today, consumer-ready 3D printing technology is available over the shelf for a very low price. The incredibly popular 3D rendering software, Blender, is free. It is not complicated at all by today's standards and doesn't incur *any* cost to implement.
The real reason we don't use AI-trained task-specific robots, is because *they have an unacceptably high rate of task failure*. AI training simply doesn't work the way we expected it to when we first envisioned neural network development, and there is an unbridgeable gap between the way AI understands things and the way humans do. In the OP, you can clearly see that Duke's left leg is made of flowing liquid. The AI simply *cannot tell the difference*; to the AI, that's a normal human leg. When you're washing dishes, there's no room for this type of error: mistake a skillet for a service tray, and that's a days' loss for the company.
From this point of view, tbh, ALL arts , ai or not, are "stolen" from others. It is very very rare that something new come out. Humans artists went to art school, or read art books, or saw pictures in a museum or internet, read manga, comics, saw graffiti or even what nature offered to them.
So, in the end, what they "produce" is something that come out from these experiences or "trained" in their brain.
The only (big) difference is that artists can "feel" something..but I know many artists that work in industry most of the time have no emotions on what they produce.. so probably not much big difference..and thry will be happy to receive an "help" from AI because of boring tasks.
You’re missing one huge element here, which is that an AI doesn’t have a real imagination so it can only produce images within specified keywords, prompts, and parameters. It can’t think outside the box. A human has no such limitations, they can take inspiration from ANYWHERE — including their own memories, dreams, and experiences — and incorporate it into the work. That is something an AI simply cannot and will not ever be able to do.
Yes I agree, but probably like someone else already replied, human immagination is like the processing of a task for the AI. Well, I'm not saying that is the same...the AI don't think like us, it is just triggered on demand and at this point produces something that has a meaning for us. Its output has no meaning for itself. An AI will never says "Wow that is really cool" or "this is the worst draw I ever made". But many elements that build the final output in an AI context are the same but with a different name. In the end, ai developer are trying to emulate some brain processes. And in fact, when ppl says "the AI stole images" is an "humanification" of a AI behavior, but if there is a "thieft" that would be the developers that trained the AI, because the AI has never "think" on purpose to search and learn from these images.
Probably, the right definition for AI, today, is just a very complicated tool.
A human has way more data input and complexity than an AI which let's that complex system create something like imagination.
Humans are just organic machines made of atoms. If we can do something, we can make something do it.
But human artists aren’t just going off of previous works they’ve consumed. They also incorporate their own personal experiences, ideas, thoughts, and dreams into their work. An AI can never match a human because it has no life experience to draw from.
This is just mass paranoia, if you stop to think about it logically you'll see that scenario is very unlikely to happen.
And even if that happens, new jobs will open up , people will have to learn new skills , all that stuff that has already been done in history.
Also, too much unemployment leads to civil wars , I don't see a future like this actually (as I said, very unlikely to happen).
I support the idea of using ai as an assistant tool , as it would ease the painful deadlines and really help the artist, but for some cheap old one picture thing it's rational to spend as little as possible to maximize profit.
Bottom line is, every job is always at risk , but it won't stop people from getting money somehow, and if it leads to it, learning new skills to keep up with technology and culture.
Even if I was working my dream job or doing what I do best , life will be life , you can never know what will happen but can always adapt.
It might not even be technology, I lost my job, or rather my ability to do my job after an accident (currently disabled and unemployed, having a new surgery in two days...yay...) , so now I am learning something new that I can do in my state , it's a bummer, but it won't stop me from living or putting food on my table
Thanks mate, reading these responses puts my mind at ease a little. I make a good rate with art, but the rise of Ai recently gave me reason to learn new skills, and try doing my own thing through social media! I thought maybe reaching an audience that wants to see and support my work would be a nice direction
Combining an already acquired skill with a new one seems the way to go nowadays.
And besides, I don't think ai can compare to a real artist touch , my sister went to art school and sold some of her works when rising her first daughter, she works as a literature teacher (so off if you ask me) , but also has like a mini-shop she opens at anime conventions and sells stuff (anime related) with the skills she got from selling her art.
Now, by any means we are a rich family or something, I'd say a little below average (don't own house, don't have more than needed in the bank) , but we live our life's happily passing by and adapting to this cruel world.
In my opinion, art can get you far, because if you can imagine it , AND even draw it? Or make it some kind of reality, that's a superpower beyond what you can read in comic books.
Either way, I know we as humans will find a way (and then screw that way and find a new way, yeah, history gets old pretty fast, pun unintended) and you as an artist will find whatever you are looking for , wish you luck my internet friend.
Art is still untouchable. People who want to sell art? Not so much.
You got some feelings you want to write out? Music out? Paint out? Etc. Hey, awesome. Go right ahead.
Do it for yourself.
Don't expect some mark to purchase it.
I remember the Eragon author’s new book was going to have an AI generated cover. I mean if that ain’t the ultimate insult to the creative medium…it is just sickening. I hate this. I really do.
Why are they forced to hire an artists when they can use AI? Is it not their choice?
Cause they ordered it on fiverr.
Duke Nukem needs to be left in the past. It was an ass game back then & we don't need a shitty ai remaster.
This is an ass opinion.
Huh? The remaster isn’t being done by AI. The article says that the art they commissioned wasn’t supposed to be AI-generated, and they’ve pulled the art and presumably gotten a refund from the “artist.”
Duke 3D was a top-notch shooter
Translating the tone and humor for modern audiences would be difficult
it's unfortunate, the game was so much fun to play and had such great progression. Shadow Warrior too! 3D Realms was something else in that era.
Updoot for the Shadow Warrior mention. A self-deprecating, mindless shooter that's just "fun".
I loved that game, hell I still do. it's rough loading it up these days, but it's still just so fun to run around causing mayhem and listening to Lo Wang crack jokes
I get that "AI Bad" and all of that other stuff, but lets be honest. When was the last time you let a cover art dictate what game you are going to buy?
This isn't any worse than those generic "Movie" cover arts you see in Triple AAA.
I think it's less about whether the art is good or bad and more about the implication it has for the future of jobs. I have friends who are graphic designers in the video game industry and it's a shame to see their job getting replaced by a facsimile. It's ultimately just a corner being cut so companies can make a larger profit, I think that is going to become more commonplace as time goes on.
So here’s the psychology of if. It has nothing to do with it being cover art. It’s AI art that could of been someone’s job.
The point is to not allow it, AT ALL. Because when you let it slide, it’s going to be like boiling a frog. It will get worse slowly to the point that when you notice it’s a problem, it’s to late.
I think it is going to happen whether or not we like it. The vast majority of people isn't going to care if something is created by AI or not. Oh sure if it is especially bad they'll notice. But AI is going to improve to the point where you won't be able to tell the difference.
And it isn't like you can just go "Big Anime tiddies" and there you go it is perfect. You need to know what you want and how you want it and that is a skill.
It kinda just shows the effort behind it
If a person would have done this they would have been praised for going with a classic reference cover, ‘back to basics approach’ to Duke.
OMG! WHO CARES?!?!
I don't really have any problem with the use of AI art, as long as it's someone using their own art/photos for the AI's learning. I doubt the game devs did that though.
A.) how do they know for sure if it is?
B.) It looks fine so who cares?
Look at the hands and feet. People care because this would normally be a job for an artist who would have clearly done a better job. Its an example of corporate cost-cutting that sacrifices artistic integrity.
His hands and feet were the first thing i checked. They look fine to me
First thing I noticed was that the right leg melts with the ground. The guns don't have a clearly defined shape. They point out more errors on twitter. I use AI art all the time, I'd say I'm somewhat trained to spot the usual AI art mistakes. Foreground/background geometry that looks like nothing in particular is a big one. Objects melting into each other is very common. A good editor could fix all of this
He’s missing a finger and his knee turns into terrain. I genuinely don’t know how you can look at that and say ok
His finger is on the trigger, hidden beneath the weapon due to the camera angle. It’s not that hard to understand
He just mad that AI is drawing better / faster than the average human artists now.
His left hand is misshapen and only has four fingers. The gun in his left hand makes no damn sense whatsoever if you take more than an attosecond to look at. His right foot and half of his left leg are melded with the scrap pile he's standing on top of.
I don't know how your standards can be THAT low.
His left hand has 5. The index finger is on the trigger, hidden beneath the weapon due to the camera angle.
It’s Duke Nukem my guy, none of the guns make that much sense, the series has plenty of goofy scifi weapons. Hell, Destiny has weapons that make less sense visually than this thing.
His legs “fusing with the scrap” is just weird lighting, if you took “an attosecond to look at it”, you could see where his body ends and the scrap begins.
No need to be rude over such a minuscule disagreement, man.
Literally done in seconds with very good detail from tech that hasn't been out for even a year, so already better than average artist there. Yes there are slight flaws, but you won't be able to tell the difference soon. It's the reality of AI and you just have to accept it.
If the cover is AI art I'm incredibly impressed. I can often times hardly get Duke Nukem's likeness
Literally look at the hands
What the accurate amount of fingers he has? The left finger positioning looks a bit strange, but the positioning of that gun looks more strange. I was emphasizing the outfit most of all. Alot of the times when I've attempted to make Duke Nukem in Mid Journey, the outfit comes out very randomly where he looks like he's a biker in mad max
The right foot and half of the left leg are also melded with the terrain...
According to their statement, they commissioned an artist and the artist used A.I. to generate it. They might be lying, but it's not like some account manager typed a prompt in and then said "looks good to me, screw hiring someone." Now they might be lying, or they might have commissioned a "hybrid artist" because he was cheaper, but they might have simply not known what a hybrid artist is and thought his portfolio matched the style they were going for.
I'm a commercial artist and it took me a while to see where the telltale signs were, I'm not surprised if the folks who commissioned it didn't notice or even know what to look for.
Yep, this doesn't look to be entirely the fault of the devs. I think it's a good chance they didn't realize much of the work in the artist's gallery was AI generated and the artist doesn't even seem to mention the use of AI anywhere in their portfolio. Doubt any game dev would knowingly dish out any amount of money to someone for very easy to make AI art when they could also very easily generate it themselves for free.
This is funny ash too me
Why didn't the person who generated this image use inpainting to reroll hands and feet? Or use depth maps, canny's, or wireframes using ControlNet to guide the image model?
The real crime here isn't that the artist used AI image generation, but that the artist used AI image generation poorly
damn I was kinda digging how they made him look even more deranged and sleazy but I also didn't really care it was coming out and didn't look very hard.
God I love the interenet
The art is still better than any of the games deserve.
lazy lazy lazy, they pay an "Artist" to do this crap
“Shake it baby!”
Mostly surprised this passed a basic quality check, one of his legs is fucked and his hand on the gun over the right is like bleeding through it... likely other issues too.
Nothing wrong with using tools to accelerate processes; someone just got extra lazy.
lmao this franchise will never not be a shit show
Now everyone is talking about the game.
looks good to me
If they can afford to remaster a game they can afford to *hire an artist*.
duke nukem sounds like somebody who went to death row for being a child molester