Raw LLM Responses

@GrumpDog I’ve been exposed to the processes and one of my goals is a new process. I would love to create a smaller model which is trained on my art and my art *only*. My code, my art. The results will be mine. Abstract and strange compared to my own art. Perhaps incomprehensible. But mine. My degree has a major in AI systems. I know what I’m talking about. I refuse to acknowledge AI as a proper medium of art until they’re properly legislated to not be plagiarism interpolation machines. Because that’s what they are. That’s all they do. They eat copyrighted and stolen artwork and spit out statistical analysis of it in the form of another image. It’s not created with intent or purpose. It’s created to be a placeholder or a cheap asset for corporations to cut as many costs as they can. I would support gen ai wholeheartedly if people could control if their art was stolen. They can’t. I don’t buy photos of things without at least implicit consent from the owner of the thing. If art is on display in a museum and I like it, I’ll buy a print. If the artist hides it in a box, intended never to be seen, I would not buy a photo from the thieves - it goes against the intent of the art. It makes the art worthless, reducing it to something that’s to be looked at instead of the actual fucking meaning behind it. All art has meaning - even if that meaning is something like “This four year old really likes fire trucks”. The closest gen AI art has to meaning is “fulfil the users commands to the best degree”. That’s a charitable one - fundamentally it was designed to be something new which makes operations exponentially cheaper for others so they send the creators money. In my hypothetical home grown home fed gen ai, that would have a meaning. A better one beyond profit for shareholders. Something created out of the love of technology and art, like post processing effects but a few hundred times more complex and it takes a few hours to do anything. An apartment is art. The art of the person who lives there. An apartment complex is art. The art of the architect who designed it. Unless it’s one of *those* apartment complexes - cheap, optimal, grey. Built on underpaid workers, no meaning behind it, shitty materials, copy pasted from a million other apartment complexes. It could become a form of art when it’s abandoned, but its only purpose right now is to be a place to live. You know the ones. I’m not going to get English teacher on you. What I’m trying to say is that corporations cutting corners, even if it’s in a new way, even if it’s in a technologically complex way, is just fundamentally not art. Optimising the everything out of everything to get a bland wall of ads instead of a mural is not the world I want to live in so I’m *going* to fight every *fucking* step of the way whenever I see that happening. You can call me cynical or bring up the passion of the individuals involved or whatever but I *do not care*. If AI companies hadn’t seen a way to profit ridiculously off this it wouldn’t have happened and they’ve continued to squeeze every last drop out since. I refuse to support a corporate oligarchy like that.\* so I won’t. It’s quite hard to explain it to you from your perspective. It was created for the shareholders, with all the controversial elements sanded off, and optimised to create the most copyrighted product you could possibly make that’s still legal. Until those shareholders are out of the equation and *everyone* else is given their autonomy back in how their art is used I will not support it. \*Don’t even bother bringing up YouTube - I already know the ‘you criticise society yet you partake in it. curious’ argument.