A big draw to this game is the general style and aesthetic it possesses. AI cannot currently replicate this at a similar level. Furthermore, AI generated art steals art from actual human artists. Artists who deserve to be paid for their work and for the talent they possess. The art in this game has always been a fundamental foundation for its success, why ruin that with AI slop?
#Don’t start using AI art
zenith sparrow
dense geyser
How does ai steal from human artists
glass geode
AI (AI companies) use human artists art to train the model it runs to produce content.
When the AI content is sold the human artists whose art was used to train the model do not receive royalties even though their art was used to create the model which made the content.
Same issue applies for any data AI has used to train or refine its model that is not in the public domain...e.g using code on Github to train an model to create code.
Additionally instead of paying/valuing humans to create art or write code we outsource to AI which devalues and commodifies the human creative effort.
In the medium term there will be a correction as AI can not generate anything good on its own and needs human output to train up its models.
In the long term once AI can generate art and code as well as humans then we end up fully commodifying those endeavors. The question becomes what is of value for humanity to perform if AI does it better.
Anything we can do to value ourselves and delay the long term view I think is worthwhile at this point in time...including not using AI art or studios who rely on it to create content.
dense geyser
I mean I don't see how it's that different from human artists learning from/using other artists works as inspiration, and then offering a service that's speedy and cheap to outcompete other human artists
polar mountain
This could be a long debate lol
glass geode
The difference is in the social contract.
When a person releases a piece of art they do so knowing and inherently agreeing that another human can indeed take it as inspiration and create their own art with it. This is an accepted social contract.
This social contract exists because the artist knows it takes years of effort for another to learn the craft.
They understand the difficulty in creating new art.
It exists because if an artist creates something too similar to another artist they can be sued legally for it as well as lose their reputation in their industry.
Most artists who release art do not inherently agree to allow AI companies to take it and train their model.
It’s been a while now so some may have explicit contracts with AI companies, but mostly AI companies take without asking.
The difference can also be in the form of a business contract.
When the NY Times sells a subscription it’s under the business contract of a human being reading and utilizing the articles.
The agreement is not for all of its articles to be scraped into a large language model and sold as a separate product/service of which they will receive no profits from the sale of.
The future...
A possible future is that it is part of the social contract that anything published is accepted to be utilized by AI (can be dystopian).
It could be that AI companies pay royalties via regulation and law to those whose data it uses to create its model.
It could be that people get into contracts with AI companies to allow their work product to be used to create AI models.
languid monolith
I steal from human artists