GoodEye8

There's also FAQ that on the initiative page but the video is more comprehensive (43 questions instead of the 17 on the site) because it's made after the initiative FAQ and goes more in-depth concerning the specific grievances people brought up. And I didn't expect anyone to listen to the whole video, the video is timestamped so you could find whatever specific grievance you might have.

I second Shadows of doubt. I haven't played the release version yet (I'm still building factories in Satisfactory) but I can give my most memorable detective work from early access. I was doing side jobs because my murder case had gone cold. I had a gig where I needed to find proof that the clients partner is having an affair. The information I got about the potential lover were some vague physical traits like eye color and shoe size. But the key information was that the lover's partner worked as Wait staff. So I

1. went through every restaurant, bar, diner etc in the city.
2. Got a list of every wait staff member.
3. Found out where they live.
4. Broke into their house.
5. Found their partner information.
6. Found the potential lover.
7. Started looking for key evidence to tie them to the affair.

The last step is where my gig ended up in a roadblock. I'm not 100% sure but I think it was bugged because I did everything I could come up with. I went through the clients partner personal stuff and found nothing. I went to their work and found nothing. I went through the lovers personal stuff and found nothing. I went to lovers work and found nothing. I even planted a tracker on both of them and followed them around to see if I missed something and I still found nothing. I even checked the mailboxes. So the key evidence was probably bugged and I couldn't find it.

Despite that I haven't had such a unique experience in any other game. It's up there in my backlog waiting for me to return, but first the factory must grow.

There's a whole FAQ which I'm sure also clarifies your problems with the initiative.

To be fair, Windows is getting worse every year as well and Linux isn't officially supported by most developers so you kinda need to compromise somewhere.

I personally went with Linux because I got fed up with Windows bullshit and the games I can't play are mostly games I'm not really interested in playing in the first place.

I've covered this specific multiple times already. My point was more against the general idea that anything AI related is not art.

I think the statement “then photography took over” is doing a lot of work here. It’s incredibly inaccurate to say that photography took over as the primary means of visual creativity.

I think my context there was pretty obvious so it's somewhat disingenuous to take it out of context. Photography has largely taken over portrait paintings. I think photography has also largely taken over scenic paintings. I never said it completely replaced painting, it became a tool in the hands of artists the same way AI art can become a tool.

I think that most artists would still prefer to paint something that they can consider “their art”, over typing a sentence and getting back a result. Sure, it’s neat, but it will never be anything more than a novelty, or a shortcut to generic results. The process of creation is only really 50% the final result, and the process itself is an important aspect and not just a means to an end.

And I think artist will use AI to come up ideas for their art and use the output as a canvas.

Using AI just feels like a weird commodification of art - like using only pre-made Unity assets for a game and nothing else, and then having someone else make it for pennies.

Because that's the current use of AI. It doesn't mean AI will stay this way.

I’ve seen so many bizarre “AI artists” cropping up, especially online, who legitimately try to sell AI art online for hundreds of dollars.

I'm not talking about those people and I've already mentioned elsewhere that their "work" can be considered questionable.

I think the reasons people buy art can usually be put into three buckets: they appreciate the process that went behind it, they like the style of the artists or that painting in particular, or they find some meaning in it. If you wanted to buy AI art why not just prompt it yourself. What process, or artistic style, or meaning is even in AI art?

Let's say the artist trains an AI model solely on their own previous art and then releases some of those AI generated images. The person who likes the style or a particular painting, do they care it was made by AI? Doubt it, because it's in the artists style. The person who appreciates the process that went behind it, is "I put my previous works into an AI model and the model generated this image based on what I imagined this image should be" really that much less impressive than "I imagined what this image should be and so I sat behind my drawing board and drew it"? As for meaning, the artist still chooses what to release. If they release something it must have a meaning. I think it would be extremely disrespectful towards an artist to claim the art they chose to release has no meaning.

It’s not even like AI can be trained on an artist’s own works. It takes millions of samples to train AI, which a singular artist would never be able to produce. So, at some point, that model will have had to have stolen the content of its results from something.

I thought we were talking about it from a philosophical point of view. I'm not about to predict the future and claim it could or couldn't be done, but let's say it could be done. Would that change your opinion?

How would a child produce the exact same image if they don’t have my AI model?

That's not the case here and I think the artist in the article has no claim to that image. I'm against the general idea that using AI instantly disqualifies someone as an artist, which is what the other person believes.

I'm not saying it's bad, I'm saying claiming it as your own original work becomes very questionable. If you want to claim AI art as your own work you have to use only your own artistic expressions in the AI model.

If you want to be the old man yelling how the world is changing for the worse, go ahead. You are entitled to your conservative opinion.

I didn't say I'm completely against imitation. I more or less implied that's where lines start to blur. If someone spends their entire life learning Picasso and can perfectly imitate Picasso then I don't consider that to be not art. Similarly if someone did that and fed it into an AI model that then imitates them imitating Picasso I think that's still fine.

But if you throw in all the famous artists and have the AI generate an image could you really imitate it? Not only would you have to imitate how all of them paint and what colors they use, you should also be able to tell the difference which part of the painting was influence by which artist so you could imitate it correctly. And if we factor in that AI can blend brush strokes it becomes even more harder to actually imitate. That's so muddy water it's easy to make arguments for and against.