I’m a software dev. There’s this colleague who can’t do shit without AI. The thing is that whenever Claude asks a question, he selects the “Recommended” answer reading neither the question nor the answer. It makes my blood boil.
Well, he thinks he’s a developer
Obviously they’re not artists. 🙄
They’re prompt engineers. It’s highly complex, hard science shit.
I want y’all to know I took a deep breath before writing this.
Writing AI prompts does not make someone an artist. Nobody is seriously contesting that, and nobody is claiming otherwise.
But you also can’t just type, “Hey Grok, make me a 30-minute video recreating the entire Cell Saga,” and have a finished production magically appear. That’s not how this works.
There is an actual pipeline involved. Multiple AI applications and other software, compositing, editing, sound design, music, voice acting, visual direction, continuity, revisions, and an enormous amount of human labor. Some of these projects involve hundreds of hours of actual work. The AI is a tool within that process; it isn’t a magic button that produces a finished piece of media from a sentence.
And I know, I know, AI is the literal Antichrist around here. I get it. But this caricature of what people are actually doing with AI is becoming a massive misrepresentation of the technology.
It’s getting irritating because I see this constantly now. The same joke, over and over, based on the assumption that someone typed a single sentence into an LLM and somehow produced an entire film, song, animation, or game.
At this point, I don’t know if some of y’all are intentionally ignorant about what LLMs and generative AI actually do, or if you just enjoy reflexively hating the technology. Either way, the joke has run its course.
It isn’t funny anymore. It’s just inaccurate.
You’re railing against a strawman here. It’s an exaggeration to imply that people type literally one sentence in and produce art yes, but that’s not the complaint. The issue people here have is that AI “artists” take the part that requires actual skill and scoop it out, then fill the void back in with a gloopy beige paste. Then, like you’re doing here, they demand to be taken seriously and/or at least have their time respected because of all the externalities, like the time spent washing the scoop or choosing the exact right consistentcy of gloop to fill it with.
Generating five minutes worth of sexy women shooting orcs that explode into papercut gore confetti takes a lot of time. Stitching those together into a 3 minute video takes a lot of time. None of that is time that I give a shit you spent doing - it’s like buying out a vending machine, putting it all on fancy plates and demanding I call you a chef. Sure the skittles look kinda pretty, but all the careful arrangement in the world won’t make them taste better.
I would argue that skill is not that much the issue.
If I had a button that put the image on my head directly onto a canvas I would be the best artist of the world. For me at least art is not about the skill but about the vision.
And the problem with AI is that it greatly limits the vision. It’s almost impossible to truly move the image or the concept you have in your head to the canvas using thar technique. Because the model will produce the images it has been train for, not the image in your head.
Other manual techniques do allow people to put the image in their head onto the canvas much more accurately and with greater intention. Independently of the complexity of skill.
I think photography is the greatest example. As it implies to tweak values and push a button, it’s not something that requires carefully hold a brush or have painting skills. But the camera allows you to produce the images as you want to produce them, with great intention.
That’s also why it’s true what the user abobe is saying that the person who has a pipeline and spent hours tweaking things with ai tools will get better results than the one who just wrote “draw me a pretty girl”. Because they would have probably spent a lot of time for the model to output something similar to what they had in mind. But still the models, even the most advanced ones, are too limiting in many areas.
At least that’s my take.
Hey I write prompts for ai to write prompts that create art so I’m basically an art professor over here teaching new artists.
Do AI prompt “artists” get angry when other people steal their prompts?
Yes. They think ideas are what making the art, not the implementation. That’s also part why they think artists are “full of themselves”: Many of them talk about them having great “world changing” ideas for art, but they’re always stuff like “what if GTA was set in [insert real life city here]”, or “can you hack [popular FPS] to have VR support?”.
They actually do. I’ve seen this on AI chat bot sites. People won’t allow people to read the prompt/personality of the bot because they get all butt hurt when someone just copys and pastes their “work” it’s really cringe because it’s a basic llm. It’s not some flagship model or anything like that. It doesn’t care, at all.
They absolutely do and they have feuds about it, funniest shit ever. “That thief thieved my plan for thieving!”
I recall a twitter thread that went around a while ago that had some Sloperator all pissed off because someone ‘stole’ his prompt, and that person’s Computer Rendered Artificial Picture got way more likes.
So, yes, the Sloperators get quite mad when someone uses the same prompt.
Sloperators
I’ve been calling them sloppies
Outdated reference: Makin’ sloppies!
Timeless reference: Fuck Rob Schneider
Some do, some don’t
Oh you mean those people that instruct an ai computer to draw pictures for them?
But but con artists were always artists though
Namely the ones you hardly hear of.
I’m tired of this constant fuckai spam. AI slop this, AI slop that. AI slop impacts me almost not at all, while the constant hate mongering by fuckai is getting on my nerve.
Not a SINGLE “AI artist” ever “looked at you like this”. You are building a strawman as the target of your hate because you can’t do anything else with it. Are we a society defined by hate now?
Hide the sub. You don’t have to see it.
if this was fuckAI 100%
If it was true 100%
This is just kinda… meh
my local fringe theater festival this year was plagued with AI slop posters and copy
I’m really happy you’re unaffected, and curious about your work and social groups that you’ve managed to avoid its negative impacts, but for a lot of us it’s a daily barrage.
Almost everyone in my family keeps sending me AI generated documentary shit all the time. Problem is bets I can tell only 50% of it factual. Every single video in my family, I’m tired of debunking boss. And despite proving more than a few dozen times, that it’s not 100% reliable data, they are content in accepting half truth and half lies for at least the half is true. And it’s getting in my nerves. So yes fuck Gen AI artists. They can rot in hell.
I’m slightly less mad at pure art promoters at least they’re not misibforming. But I’m still mad because art is human expression to me. A human has to decide every single stroke of an image, some speak more than others, but everything is intentional. Mistakes and all.
With Gen AI there is no active decision making in most of the image, prompt was active decision sure, but the details, how each curl of hair should be, or how two colors should blend, 99% of prompter artists are not making that minute decisions. And that to me is just expressionnless. So I might hate them less, but they too can rot in hell.
Yeah with the images now you can just ask a computer to make any image so I feel like the novelty’s gone, so why not just try to draw it yourself?
Even an amateur sketch sparks more joy, more connection, and tells me more about your passion than the most detailed most smoothest most super duper HDR style generated image.
In fact I would literally prefer a blank box with some plain alt text describing the image you would have generated. That way I can at least see what you the person were trying to communicate rather than what was statistically inserted based on association, temperature, and whatever advertising partners won the automated micro-bid for placement in the image.
See my other comment. You’re just pushing hate against people instead of meaningful regulations.
I push a lot on things, but thanks I’ll check it out
More like all turd ego 🤪
Just because you had the chance to avoid it (or so you think at least) doesn’t mean it’s okay in any way, and society for for everyone is being durably impacted by all this fir the worst, demonstrably so. So yes, we’ll keep complaining and denouncing it, sorry for your terrible inconvenience
But you’re not. You don’t do that. You’re denouncing people, turning them into villains. You’re not suggesting any sensible regulation (e.g. https://regulations.ai/). You’re not attacking the root of the problem, neoliberal capitalism.
All you’re doing is spraying shit into the ether.
actually we do both, and they are both necessary. Reforming or revolutionizing the system is the root of it all, and in the meanwhile, calling out and demonizing people consciously using the most wasteful and unethical tools available is also good and important. People that keep using these generative AI tools while aware of their impacts deserve being made fun of and cast out of a society which they clearly don’t care much about
A far more pragmatic and helpful approach would be to educate affected consumers on media literacy. The people sharing AI slop are the exact same ones who share fake news, fall for malware attachments, and fall for other scams even without AI. Tackling the root cause will handle the rest naturally. Hating on the tools or their creators is pure copium.
turning them into villains
Nah, they did that to themselves
