Not even close, I can't even remember any of the names or what the fursona looked like. It was probably around 2019, even if I did have screenshots that phone is long gone now. I doubt it's the only time something like that has happened though.
Adopts who designs I like i just save and modify a few things as I wait for said artist and customer to kill themselves
Even though I draw I'm not fucking paying for something I can easily just screenshot and put away in my folder for inspiration.
Vivienne Medrano (Viv, vivziepop) of Hasbin Hotel and Helluva Boss "fame" did all this (""""illegally stole adoptable fursonas""""). It's all he-said-she-said bullshit which is probably all pointless since as stated earlier, you can't usually be granted copyright over a character design on the basis of one random image of a character. Practically everything is up for grabs until it's pretty well established and developed with a backstory and character bible.
The coin will never land on heads for these people and they’re too dumb to call tails. Just look at the protests over Maduro being captured, they can’t even tell you why they’re protesting. They mald over AI, but when you press them lightly by asking why, they’ll either regurgitate some low IQ talking point someone else told them or they’ll get angry. I wouldn’t say they drift aimlessly, though, as it’s clear every viewpoint they form or argument they adhere to and side with is rooted in caring about what other people think of them.
I suspect the grand irony is that they hate AI for the sole reason that they were told to. It's not that they have any specific, well-examined reason for it - they haven't the faintest understanding other than "robot program steals everyone's art and churns out slop" - and in fact, they're unable to reason around it. Like the LinkedIn pajeets and dumbstruck normies, they DO actually think AI is this all-powerful genius invention that can perfectly replicate things, just without """soul""". They wouldn't be worrying about poisoning AI datasets if they thought it was an interesting tool that's mediocre in many applications. Years of Reddit (or similar) usage has crippled their executive functions and they simply adopt whatever the correct opinion is, when AI came out everyone was impressed at what it could produce, but they didn't further analyze and think from there, the only way their thoughts changed were that they put the old ones back on a shelf and picked up the new party line.
At the end of the day, People who are set in their ways don't want to change them. It's not that they hate working with AI, it's that they hate that they now have to change how they work. It's like when Zbrush or Houdini was first introduced. Some adapted, some haven't worked in the industry since. I'd bet that Houdini artists love a lot of the ai slop machines, while zbrush and photoshop painters are desperately struggling to find the point as well. It's not that they don't want to lower their workload, it's that they find the workflow archaic and boring. And ultimately that is the issue with a lot of people. It's fun to meme and haha. But when you actually wan to make a coherent product with AI which is consistent in quality, style and tone. It's a much bigger pain in the ass. Not to mention different AI tools are also far more welcome, especially in 3D and programming fields. Most movies and games use AI for animation these days. Turns out, ai shapekey generators, ai softbody/fluid sim, and ai motion correction are all fundamentally useful. AI automatic LODs are used by practically everyone in Unreal Engine 5. AI lighting engines are also common. As many gamers know however, far too common. Raytracing and nanite are very taxing after all. It's also why AI upscaling and AI frame generation technologies while useful are so often just half-assed in the industry. A lot of companies have just given up on hiring people to optimize and just say "fuck it let the ai do it." And that's also led to gamers disliking the results.
This is probably the least retarded among these takes, but it's still incredibly ignorant to what art is in this situation. I agree that the iterative, feedback-gathering parts of art are something it has over ai art. I know you can fine tune prompts and use in-painting to regenerate parts of it, but I think it'll be a long while before ai can interpret feedback and prompts with the same nuance as an actual human artist (and an ai won't ask, 'wait, do you mean x?' if it's given ambiguous or unclear directions like a person would.) But at the end of the day, the "story" behind a particular piece of art doesn't really matter when it's a product. Whether a great piece of art was made in an hour or slowly made over months of slow work, it's only really as valuable as the finished product. I don't agree, but I can understand the desire to try to cut down on drafting/sketching phases since it has a negligible impact on the final product and its perceived value compared to the finalized art. (Also lmao at this cuck just posting a screenshot of what he wrote in his own article)
Nope. The only real dangers of AI are for the consumer usually. A lot of devs have been even sloppier than usual lately. However, it's not because AI makes them sloppy. It's because they implement them in sloppy ways. Like never baking their lighting because Lumen exists or making everything Nanite instead of optimizing for LODs. Or letting DLSS fix everything. But these are all things that the devs themselves could fix. Their refusal to do so is not AI's fault.
I always find it funny that literally none of the people calling something slop know what it means. Literally none of them know it's the final remnants of /pol/'s cultural influence and the reason slop is a popular word is because people used to call shit goyslop. I can't imagine the main reason you would hate nvidia is because of an ai video though. Of all the absolute bullshit they do and you choose this to be pissed off over?
For one you can tell the entire thing was written by a leftie redditor with a hate boner. Remember when everyone used to say wikipedia was bullshit because anyone can go on there and change shit? I miss those days. But yea, the page literally says that ai slop is the 'its my birthday and i cant even get one like' indian spam posts. Said it so many times that it's also losing it's meaning, but the word slop has completely lost it's meaning. I churn out my slop and I am a nazi and a terf. None of those words mean anything anymore. It's low effort shit made for engagement or apparently shitposting. Please tell me, how in any way is a random collection of what is essentially stock video you'd use to test a screen's colour balance either of those? Is nvidia engagement farming for money? Considering the trillions in US military funding they get every day I doubt they need twitter ad revenue. And it's certainly not a shitpost either. It also is most definitely not made by someone in a developing country considering nvidia on it's own has more money than most developing countries in total. This is by the fucking definition of wikipedia not ai slop.
Why are readers even adding "context"? It's clearly AI-generated because NVIDIA literally says it is. Their "context" is just bias from their retardation.
remember that brief period when community notes were an actually useful feature instead of an epic downdoot?
Community notes take away monetization from tweets, so they are trying to be petty by taking away the money that could have been earned from the engagement.
This guy has no sense of proportion. Larian used a couple of AI generated textures in a critically acclaimed game and maybe some of their employees use AI to brainstorm sometimes... conclusion: their CEO doesn't understand how art is made. Despite having founded the company in 1996 and been heavily involved in the creative direction of all its games. Certified games journo moment.
This is probably the least retarded among these takes, but it's still incredibly ignorant to what art is in this situation. I agree that the iterative, feedback-gathering parts of art are something it has over ai art. I know you can fine tune prompts and use in-painting to regenerate parts of it, but I think it'll be a long while before ai can interpret feedback and prompts with the same nuance as an actual human artist (and an ai won't ask, 'wait, do you mean x?' if it's given ambiguous or unclear directions like a person would.) But at the end of the day, the "story" behind a particular piece of art doesn't really matter when it's a product. Whether a great piece of art was made in an hour or slowly made over months of slow work, it's only really as valuable as the finished product. I don't agree, but I can understand the desire to try to cut down on drafting/sketching phases since it has a negligible impact on the final product and its perceived value compared to the finalized art. (Also lmao at this cuck just posting a screenshot of what he wrote in his own article)
This sounds very nice in the abstract, but it requires context. In the real world, most artists for even very good games do not go through a tortured artist's journey every time they need to make a new brick texture. Comic and manga artists on tight deadlines have been known to trace backgrounds. There are definitely shortcuts in the production of any large-scale creative product that you would like to actually finish: a big part of the creative process is knowing which ones you can take without unduly compromising the final product. For a lot of games, one of those shortcuts is going to be generating the brick textures, and to act like that's some kind of horrible sin is, well, deranged.
There's your biggest issue. The trio of him Drew Gooden and Danny Gonzalez idk just that ex vine trio give me the same vibes. It's that fake astroturfed corpo youtber feel, it's like watching a mr beast video but if it was just him talking. The best way I can sum up these people is that Danny GONZALEZ got called out by a single white woman with less than 10 likes on twitter for saying the word spic in a 5 year old video and then went on a livestream to cry and flagellate himself before the mob about how sorry he was.
I remember watching a video by this guy about the Apple VR headset thing (I want to call it Google Glass but that obviously wasn't its name, seriously what was it again) and I thought it was a pretty fair and balanced "I used this overpriced gizmo for a while and yeah it's kinda lame" kind of review with some funny moments. I figured yeah he's okay for a moustache haver.
