I feel like this should come as a realization to you Green that this is, in fact, an artist community. We are having this discussion because you inserted yourself into it after Skeddles offered to help make sure people's art wasn't scraped off the internet and used without their consent (an objectively nice thing of him to offer and raise concern about) with you waltzing in saying "who even cares?". You're the only person who uses this site to biannually try to troll and annoy people you knew on the internet a decade ago. Plenty of us actually make a living doing art and care about the art we create but this might be an alien concept to you at this point.
You're making an ass of yourself. Again.
Okay but you don't see the difference between automation eliminating jobs people actually want to be doing rather than, assembly line workers and such?
As for what audience I mean, I am being unspecific since I don't actually know exactly what whill happen and which mediums it will impact. Wil publishers give up on the expensive and risky process of signing new authors and just let language models generate books based on market-research keywords? Will they start writing blockbuster scripts? Will generative art models become capabel of animation anytime soon? to the point they start replacing live action as well? And mayhaps you are more optimistic about AI's artistic capability, but personally I'm quite convinced this will lead to a general drop-off in quality becuase while quite impressive for a pile of math AI isn't actually all that good. Yes, like 99% of what human artists do is copy each other and remix existing ideas in one way or another yet despite this art and culture has actually evolved over the years, and I'm farily certain neural nets will never be up for that 1% that's missing. The people with the moneybags won't care because they will probably still save more money than they loose.
Idk, it seems like your viewpoint is grounded in "thing were always terrible and stuff getting worse is inevitable so why care?", which I just can't get behind at all.
Ok, an actual anwer.
Large companies replacing human workers with automation is just something that happens in life. Plenty of other sectors have dealt with it. Time for the art world to step up.
Also when you say "audiences" what do you mean? Movies? Comics? Video games? Traditional paintings? What's the medium for this hypothetical audience? Because depending on what it is it might night be as much of a "huge loss" as it may seem.
Ok so AI speeds up bootlegging. Cool. Get rid of AI and bootleging will still be there, it will just take slightly longer. But people will still find a way to rip people off.
Withouth personal attacks? Bold word for the man reaching for "hysterical" in each and every post. I kinda doubt that you're actually here for an honest attempt at understanding our viewpoint, but just in case I'll give a shot at explanation:
I think the critical point you're missing is an issue of scale and economics. Sure, a human person can decide to try an imitate another human artist. And, if they put months or even years of hard work to it, they could get prety good at it! But where does that lead? There being one more human person who can compete for the same attention, under the same terms of actually having to spend time and effort to produce anything.
By contrast, generativ AI is a machine that anyone can use with little effort (well, there's the matter of the obcene amounts of energy certain AI systems consume, but that's a different can of worms) to get very quick results. A single guy can in an afetrnoon decide to start cribbing several artists for comerical gain, and could potentially undercutt them in price as he doesn't need days/weeks to producce anything.
So saying Generative art and humans taking inspiration and/or copying eachother is the same thing is like saying... I don't know, assualt rifels aren't dangerous because if people wanted to kill each other they could already do it with blunt objects?
And that's just the small fry. If it's ever legaly feasable for the big money publishers and producers (who's wealth gives them considerable influence over the law...) to start replace human creators with automated systems, they'll do it in a heartbeat. This would be a huge loss both for the people who want to work creatively full time as well as for general audiences.
Your point being? You must have me confused with someone else because I wasn't hystercial when I deleted my gallery, no one criticized my art, it wasn't a rage quit. You're probably thinking of Dumbo.
Also this deflection doesn't move the conversation forward regarding AI. So congrats on continuing to prove how backwater and irrational this place is, because you can't even defend your ideology in a normal conversation without resorting to personal attacks.
Hysterical screaming and deleting galleries huh? Really odd behaviour!
Yes but how a tool "is inserted" into society is no different than how an artist "is inserted" into society.
That's why I said what's the difference between an AI doing an art piece and an artist doing an almost 1:1 "reference" piece.
And all I'm hearing is hysterical screaming. Some folks over on DA went as far as removing their entire galleries because they don't want them used as a learning reference for AI, but what's hilarious is that it was always used as a reference by humans.
So again, what's the freaking difference? XD
greenraven, that is one of the things I'm trying to tell you, you so strongly pretend you cannot understand, and continuously bring your strawman who "hysterically say AI = bad". Nobody (except your primitive strawman), says that the problem is "the tool". First thing is that this is not only a tool and cannot be reduced to only being a tool, becasue it is far more than just that, even if it have many traits of a tool. The second thing is that it is not it's "toolnes" what is the the problem, but all the cultural, social, economical and philosophical implications of uncontrolled application of that AI into the artworld.
Please stop hiding behind "cultural differences". I know you are smart enough to read short text with understanding. As I said, you pretending that you don't understand the adversary is an argument against yourself only. And please stop ignoring peoples arguments and pretend you don't see them while they wrote you a bunch of things, and you presented literally 0 contrarguments. Debating with you is similar as with an angry child. You are just closing your eyes and ears and screem "ne ne ne ne I can't see your arguments!", which is also only an argument against yourself. Again, "I don't see it" is not a real argument. Flat earth advocates say that they don't see any curvature, which proves nothing except their ignorance.
Copying someone's style is no different when DeviantArt tried to copyright color palettes and restrict people from using colors "they owned". Are we advocating for people to trademark artistic styles now?
@Morganne, I mean what does that tweet prove? Other than one random person was an asshat on the internet.
@gawrone, I'm not sure what your deal is but I'm going to assume cultural differences.
I'm not seeing anyone provide any rational explanations that aren't just a hysterical "AI = bad" kneejerk reation. Sure some people probably used Ai to scam someone but then some people use telephones and email to scam people, and I don't see anyone screaming to abolish telephones or internet connections.
Let's rephrase this: AI is a tool. What is so bad about this particular tool?
edit:
Just as I posted that, this piece popped up...
https://pixeljoint.com/pixelart/13962.htm
Explain to me the difference between this piece and if an AI had done it.
greenraven
So you confirmed that you are lazy. You still try to conquer the debate by bringing arguments which already have been rejected long time ago, and pretend that you discovered them, and that they are valid.
This type of analogy was formed many times before, and was always dismissed very easily. The similar attempts were made like this:
https://www.businessinsider.com/ai-image-generators-artists-copying-style-thousands-images-2022-10?r=US&IR=T
"People are selling prints made by AI that have my name in the title," he said. "Something like — 'Rusty Robot in a field in the style of Simon Stålenhag' — which is a super aggressive way of using this technology."
Great news, those of us with galleries can rest a little easier now.
Lazy? Brillantly conquered? Cure cancer? What?! I'm sure that made a lot of sense somehow before it was typed but I honestly don't even know how to respond to any of that garbled text.
@Gecimen: B and C are kind of moot points, C particularly. Yeah sure some people are losing their jobs but how is that any different than all the physical artists who lost their jobs when digital video game art started to become a thing. Circle of life.
A seems to be the only point of merit but I don't know of any concrete examples of AI art theft. Please provide an example, I'll be more than happy to look it over.
Sedge implemented some AI prevention tags as Skeddles suggested. Not sure how effective they will be but at least it shows PJ is not volunteering to feed the AI crawlers.
Long story short,
A- AI programs (both text based and visual based ones) are being used partially or fully professionally all around the world and it fully steals from all of the creative people on the web, of course with zero consent and copyright.
B- Thanks to AI programs lots of creative people are losing their jobs & work.
C- Thanks to AI programs tons of idiots around the world started to consider themselves creatives.
greenraven, this very easily look like your annual attempt at trooling out a huge argument, but I will give you only one benefit of the doubt, even if you obviously lost your right to it very long time ago.
If you are not trolling, than what you wrote prooves that the only reason you can't see anything wrong, is becasue you were to lazy to actually get familiar with any actual arguments both sides have, and just ignorantly glanced at web, noticed there is AI art that looks cool and some people who "don't like it" and you quickly formed your opinion about the whole case. If you would at least give it a tiny effort you would know that there is actuall 0 real arguments from artists bitching about using AI for the love of art (and you even will find many who actually do it themselves).
I don't know how someone of your age and online argument experience can still don't know that you really, really, REALLY can not bring an imaginary strawman it to a discussion and pretend that you have to be taken seriously or pretend that you brilliantly conquered all the people who were concerned about the topic for a long time and gave it many hours of thought, study and debate.
You are now acting like a kid who got their first A in biology and wish to go to all the doctors to help them cure cancer. But the difference is that you are the worst biology student in the entire school.
Not a contrarian opinion. I legit don't see what the big deal is. Then again this place has always had weird beliefs.
Yeah it's because its not like that? I mean obviously. C'mon Green, you didn't even commit to that contrarian opinion, you're slipping!
I honestly don't see why everyone is freaking out about AI art.
I mean obviously it's a bad thing if people start selling it like NFTs or whatever. But as long as it's public domain and fair use, and it's just done for the love of art, why the heck not?
is anyone in contact with segde? it doesn't appear pixeljoint has implimented any meta tags / robots.txt configurations that block AI spiders like chatgpt and commoncrawl, meaning all content on this site will be scraped and used to train ai, which im sure most artists would dislike.
I've already added these to Lospec, so anyone needs guidance on it hit me up.
That was cute.
Also i take that as approval of my suggestion!
a waterslide would be cool.
i haven't figured out the excuse- i mean reasoning for having it in a gallery yet but I'm sure it will enhance the experience and appreciation for art!
I guess I was thinking about it partially in terms of the gallery functionality of the site, but an arcade would fit no matter what
What, like some kind of pixel artist clubhouse? It should have an arcade.
Hey chatterbox, if PJ were ever to exist as a physical space what features would it have? (Let's just say an anonymous pixel lover threw ten million USD our way)
Earlier version is here:
https://www.linneart.com/pj/legacy/
Thanks for rehosting it! I was partial to the earlier version's layout myself though xP
Updated bookmarklet for anyone who needs it:
Javascript:window.location.href='https://www.linneart.com/pj?input='+encodeURIComponent(window.location.href);
(PJ keeps capitalising "Javascript" automatically, you may need to change it to lower-case. Who coded this lmao)
My partner is a web developer and has rescued us! I've emailed EdJr about FixelJoint so let's see if the magnifying glass can be fixed too. : )
I'm hosting it now: https://www.linneart.com/pj/ Just paste the PJ link (ex. https://pixeljoint.com/pixelart/151362.htm?sec=showcase) into the white box and click Inspect
send me the urls and I can make it happen. I already did it just now for the one you sent the screenshot of :)
I don't have an option to edit it as shown:
https://ibb.co/sHMn6Pq
I can access this old art by clicking on the green ribbons on my page, cannot do anything else to it. There are a 3 or 4 of these I would like to edit/ have access to again.
When you edit the work, does it say "Resubmit revised pixel art for approval." with a checkbox? If so, use that and it'll appear in the queue. If not, DM me the url and I'll help.
So - anyone know how to make:
ACHTUNG! PIXEL ART INACTIVE!
....active again? (relation to my previous question)
Ok, some smarty pants web dev person come save us.
Lo Spec has a palette analyzer tool.
I still see the previews when I click on old pj weekly competitions entries.
Where do you still see the previews? The most fail proof way to get rid of a file on PJ is to replace it with a different file (with a different filename...)
Is there a way to remove thumbnail previews of work you have deleted?
Yeah that sucks. I'm considering If I could make a simple replacement, but I don't know the first thing about building stuff for the web.
I find it somewhat amusing that scandinavian black metal still manages to be so extremely problematic still. Edgelords gonna edgelord, I guess.
Darkthrone, Burzum and Satyricon are my main gotos in norwegian bm, and a few more or less obscure bands.
I used to listen to Arcturus and Limbonic Arts back in the days, but I can't stand that music now, for some reason.
Happy birthday jalonso and Manupix! 
Wherever you are...
Cranks up Stabbing Westward at an even louder volume.
I don't mind enjoying Limp Bizkit either. When I'm more in a mood for breaking stuff, not burning churches 
None of those are my favs, but I admire both for historical impact on music, and they serve their specific functions like no other.
runs in and cranks up some sweet Limp Bizkit for y'all at full vol!
Please be more specific. Back in the day my top choice were Satyricon, Arcturus and Limbonic Art and Burzum.
All the time is the greatest time! Ugh! *listens to norwegian black metal*
 |  |  |  |
People who actually want to do their jobs should maybe actually do their jobs then.
One very specific example would be writers of tv shows and movies. A little while ago they went on strike, and I find that hilarious. What exactly did that do to earn their pay in the first place?
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080240/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7942796/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096684/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt17043230/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105812/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6436620/
Everything in the last decade has just been trite reboots and remakes, almost no original ideas in sight. So at this point, yeah why not turn it over to AI, might actually get something new for a change.
@Reo - It's sad that you think I'm trolling. God forbid people in 2023 be exposed to a different opinion that isn't part of the hivemind. A little debate every now and then is healthy.
Believe it or not but I still care about this place, a little bit, what it used to be at least. The only alien concept is why PJ embraced the wierd lie of "1 pixel at a time". Because I've seen artists from LucasArts and Sierra and a bunch of other places talk about art and they all seem very confused about this supposed "golden rule" of pixel art.