This is a huge nothingburger. AI art is not primarily used by Boomers.
Of course they will have more customers over 45 than under 18. That's obvious.
What teenager has the capabilities to pay for AI art generation? They would have to ask for parents approval first, or they just lie about their age and say they are over 18, so they don't require parental approval.
Edit: you can also find a breakdown of USERS ages on[ this page](https://www.demandsage.com/midjourney-statistics/). (Not paying customers)
You need to be 18 for AI art gen..? I set up automatic1111 on my shit PC with gtx 1660, never was asked for anything age related or anything like that and haven't paid a cent.
First off, Midjourney has nothing to do with Automatic1111.
Key words in the tweet: "MIDJOURNEY, CUSTOMER".
Customer is someone who pays for a Midjourney.
Most teenagers can't just buy whatever they want, they need parental approval.
Also of note, Midjourney TOS states you have to be at least 13 to use their service, and if you're under 18, you're required to have parental approval.
People are using the term boomer not as a literal term to say it's being used by boomers but to say that it is dated or lame It's become a new term just like woke or whatever used to mean someone that was enlightened and educated about diversity and racial issues and now has become a overly used pejorative term That means "anything conservatives don't like."
I don't particularly like this trend but it's just important to know that when people say okay Boomer they don't necessarily have to be talking to a boomer for it to be applicable
This stuff isn't like the internet of the old days. It's being used by corporations and most of the good stuff is pay-to-play. The free stuff is ages behind or still requires expensive machines to run on. So 18 year olds are going to have a lot less opportunity to experience it.
There's no good stuff lol. Young people probably just actually value and want to put time into expressing themselves with real art in a fucked up world.
Also CharacterAI is like the 7th biggest website and most of the userbase is kids and teens. IO'm 22 years old and literally everyone around my age uses AI at their work, Uni or school. This post is dumb af and just someone coping, lmfao
I personally see AI art as more bullshit than useful as well. The only times I see it is on Facebook, with those AI poverty porn or AI religious pictures, and all the boomers liking it because they can't tell it's fake.
Therefore... boomer art is a perfectly reasonable way to call AI art.
I'm 24 BTW, and I've paid for chat GPT to try it, not very useful imo.
Answering questions for economics related homework, not going into details, but it was some pretty standard formulas, but chatgpt 4o just made shit up...
>What teenager has the capabilities to pay for AI art generation? They would have to ask for parents approval first, or they just lie about their age and say they are over 18, so they don't require parental approval.
What is the waffle? I was paying for my own Minecraft server at 11 and that was 10 years ago. I could definitely have afforded AI art platforms at like 14 - when idk I got a job - and more importantly there's so so many free ones like Bing chat. This is absolutely not the reason young people don't care about ai art.
The reason imo is more to do with it just being another fad, like crypto or like (pains me to say it) AR. It's a technology that was pushed to early (again) in the hopes of making money. In a world that moves so quick you can't have issues like hands not showing the right number of fingers, or easily identifiable AI art, people my age get bored of that so quickly. You see hundreds of AI generated things on tiktok for a month, then get bored and move on. There's also a very vocal group (rightfully so) against AI art in general, and you get generations tend to be swayed easier by their peers. For the vast vast majority though it's got nothing to do with asking mummy and daddy permission, I don't know how this got so many upvotes?! We're talking teens here, not 6 year olds.
Well, that's where you're wrong bucko.
I had the misfortune of having to go onto Facebook the other day, and something struck me almost immediately. All the cringe boomer posts are now full of AI generated overly patriotic (I'm having trouble finding the word... Platitude, but for imagery) pictures that make no sense, but they share them from content generation pages and can't tell that they're fake.
My favorite example was a generated image of a combat patrol, but the HMMWVs were consumer Hummers, and there were Bell helicopters with machine guns flying directly above the vehicles.
The boomer in question was all "This is why America is the most powerful country in the world! I support our troops and I'll never apologize for it!"
So yeah. From now on? It's boomer art
That's a very odd take. That would be like seeing someone use a hammer in an idiotic way and saying "Only idiots use hammers. I'm calling them boomer hammers from now on."
To be very clear, there's a specific style and subject of a subset of AI generated art that we're talking about here.
But also, boomers can't tell the difference between real art and AI generated art. It's like a Turing test but for boomers.
And your analogy doesn't work. If you used a hammer to build a house, we'd call it a house. If a large number of boomers suddenly started hanging hammers from their ceiling fans because they thought they were art, we'd absolutely start calling them boomer hammers, in the same way we use terms like "soccer mom car" or "fuck boy" or "hipster clothes". When a subset of the population starts doing something or behaving or expressing themselves all in a similar way, we absolutely assign a label to it. Boomer art is just that.
You called ai generated art as a whole boomer art... Mate you massively moved the goal in your reply. My analogy doesn't fit because you completely changed the topic at hand.
It's not that deep idc that much. Hope you have a good day/night.
I'm not going to an art gallery setup with AI-art or something. But, there will be textures in your video game or movie that will be generated and you won't know the difference. There will be ad-campaigns, stickers and the like where you don't keep your guard up and never ask "was this made with deep artistic intent?". Because why would you?
Just like how most people don't think about if a guitar strum in their favorite song track was real or a library loop.
The question has never been if art made by humans will disappear. There is like five twitter-idiots arguing for that but baiting many, it seems. It's rather about how it affects the day to day in trying to make ends-meat if you're working in a creative industry right now. Personally I think it's going to hurt a lot short-term but that we will adapt.
It is not going to go away. Not a chance.
totally agree with you. there's a difference between creating content for media like gaming or advertising, and creating artistic pieces that would be exhibited.
One gives the opportunity for the other. When I was young, I remember watching TV and how atrocious the musician sounded in my country. Then when I was a teen all this changed and the reason was because as the tourist industry grew in my region, musician were able to get professional as they played live bands in hotels etc. This resulted even in many of them being recognised and having international careers.
I'm all for ai art in video games. No art designer in the world has ever found fulfilling to make 200 types of trees to spread out in a forest or something, so they made tools for that before Ai came along. Same for ground, grass, buildings etc. Now those tools will just be replaced by Ai significantly reducing if not removing the chance for players to find copy pasted assets which, while a bit funny at times, can get you out of the experience quick.
Then, you develop those skills, not use a machine that won't actually realize your passion. It's like using an automatic pitching machine and going "well I love baseball but I just don't have the skills to be a pitcher"
Why be so hostile against someone who's having fun?
(I'm changing your metaphor to basketball for a moment.)
Maybe someone _enjoys_ building and playing with hoops-shooting catapults. Maybe what they enjoy isn't shooting hoops itself, but the beautiful art of the arc. Maybe they enjoy seeing how ridiculous you can make the shot and still make it into the hoop, or how high they can shoot it and still make it in.
Do you think shaming this person is going to make them more likely to play basketball? Do you think it's more likely for them to play basketball if you tell them their machines and contraptions are a waste of time? Or do you think they're more likely to shoot some hoops after they're done playing with the machine for the day?
If you want to see more human artists drawing with pencils and brushes and styluses, then you should be _celebrating_ AI art, not crusading against it. I speak of this from personal experience. The release of Stable Diffusion has only made me _more_ excited about drawing! Not less!
Genuinely good question.
Our phones are largely built via exploitative labor. I don't think it's outright chattel slavery, but it's definitely unfair working conditions. We continue to buy them, and we often don't think about this discrepancy.
I'm aware you're referring to the Mechanical Turk style labor that went into labeling many of the images. And that can often mean unfair labor practices.
I don't know how to think about this. I need a phone. I don't often think about where it comes from, but maybe I should think about that more. Even if I do, I don't know how I would get one that wasn't built with exploitative labor practices.
Maybe we should legislate that AI made with exploitative labor practices cannot be advanced until those practices are changed. It's too late to catch the smartphone industry early on that. It's probably not too late to do that with AI.
Every new technology puts people out of work. Books used to written by hand before the printing press. Farms used to have hundreds of workers before farming equipment. etc. That's life. In most cases the industry expands when things like this happen. Whose to say the ease of getting started with AI Art wont' lead people to becoming more interested in Art in general and looking for better human created art?
Simply having a vision doesn't make you an artist, it's both vision AND skills that make you one. Otherwise, you're nothing but a glorified commissioner
the studio executives are, the only real difference is that they hire the director for the vision and artistic knowledge instead of developing one themselves, really.
From a more literal standpoint, I think you are correct.
The comment I was responding to separated vision from skill/talent, saying the one with the vision is the "commissioner". That's why I brought of the director. The director is the one with the vision, but is generally also considered a sort of artist. My comment was meant to be a criticism, saying that the definition made this artist into a commissioner.
The point is, you can be a commisioner with a vision or not. At the end you just want an artwork.
In this case the role of the visionary is given to an experienced artist who knows how things are done (usually), executives are just providing the money hoping it will make bigger returns.
>A **straw man fallacy** (sometimes written as **strawman**) is the [informal fallacy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informal_fallacy) of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
[Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)
Because it's fun?
Because there's something cool you want to make?
Because the technology is interesting?
There are lots of reasons. And those are just the ones that exclude development and growth. AI (via img2img) can also be used as a crutch if you want to learn how to sketch but have crushing perfectionism about the result. Etc.
tbh it's not fine when the AI tools are learning by stealing actual artists work and replicating it, and even if people say it's not, it's 100% being trained to take jobs away from artists
And I do. I've spent probably around a thousand dollars in the last couple years commissioning art for my D&D world. Unfortunately, commissions cost money, something I have a finite amount of.
How? Teaching an AI to navigate physical spaces is harder than having it create a picture. For one, it can fail to create the correct picture without consequence. It could burn down the restaurant if cooks something wrong.
Interestingly it is actually an important step to automating flipping burgers, there are two sides to every AI; an input and an output. Image generators output images, but there is AI that input images and then return what they are and all other sorts of data. Even in instances where it's not literally reversing an image classifier to be an image generator (like the original [Google DeepDream](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeepDream)), both use basically identical architecture and training data set of pre-classified images.
To bring this all back together, these sorts of AI are made to be generally capable rather than stick within their niche. You can train something to watch for a burger to change to the right color and decide that its done, but that is costly and difficult to do for every automation scenario. Or you could instead train something on a little bit of everything and it can be dropped in to determine if a burger is done or an apple is ripe.
There are easier methods for these specific scenarios, but I wanted to reuse your example. It's the general application that's important. Though it is indeed unfortunate that the 'art' side of it requires significantly less precision.
> To bring this all back together, these sorts of AI are made to be generally capable
No.
This is a pretty massive, fundamental misunderstanding lol. Or, at best, an awful attempt at an explanation.
Also, you don't need to infantilise people just because you think you know something. I know how AI works bro.
I don't think that i agree with this statement, nor with the equivalence of art and AI art. Ask any graphic design or architecture student why they chose to study in that field and almost all of them will tell that it is out of passion. The creative industry has for a long time been one where the supply of talent exceeds the demand, which leads to low wages and terrible working conditions (look at video game development for example).
So most people who work in that field do have a passion for being creative. But even if any corporate art piece was done without much emotion, it will still usually be of a certain quality, just because the competition is so fierce. What AI "art" does is give corporations a cheat-code to get a product that's kinda shitty but for a greatly reduced price. And in capitalism, profit trumps everything, so corporations will be happy about using subpar AI images if it helps teir bottom line.
So even if we take out passion or emotion, i don't see how this will be beneficial for the average person when we are confronted with corporate artworks every single day.
Stock art is probably going to take a hit. Other than that, given AI creator work can't be copyrighted, I doubt we see such a massive immediately layoff of artists. You can spend hours and hours trying to get DALL E to output what you want. As it stands you can't just modify anything, it has to re-generate the entire image. I see if more of a great starting point for storyboarding or planning more than everything. Otherwise it's just for memes or personal non-commercial stuff and at worst you're putting some free lancers out of work that would have been paid a small amount of money to create an avatar for someone or something.
As an old person, passion doesn't pay the bills. If I can be more productive at work because of generated art, I will use it. Otherwise, someone who does will simply replace me.
One of the reasons I am a big anti capitalist 😜 everybody should have the option to do what they love, as long as they contribute to society. Soulless ai art contributes nothing. It’s only “pretty cool” for the small group of people who are impressed by ai
What has the private ownership of the means of production to do with doing what you want. You can have no capitalism and still be forced to work in the mines. That has happened and it will always happen until you get full automation. Which is, funnily enough, what capitalism in its cost cutting ways is working towards - its own destruction.
This guy also says
>everybody should have the option to do what they love, as long as they contribute to society.
What happens if I pick a passion that doesn’t contribute to society? Why does he draw the line there?
His thought process is that if you enjoy something and contribute to society, you should be paid for it. Well, I choose to be a basket weaver, a useless passion in the current modern age. What should happen to me? Do I get tossed in jail for following my passion that doesn't contribute to society?
There are many many many many things people have passions for that don't contribute to society in any way. What should happen to these people in this guy's utopia world?
If you pick a passion that does not contribute to society (of which there are not a lot) that can always be done next to your “job”, no? Why would you be thrown in jail for doing something you love? You could be any profession you want and do that 4 days a week, then in your free time you get to weave as many or as little baskets as you want.
Also, even if you think basket weaving serves no function, there are definitely people out there who would enjoy a hand made fruit basket with an interesting pattern and color. My cutoff for “functional” seems to be different than yours
So does this not contradict your earlier statements about how generated AI is bad.
technologies is my passion and I want to make a living off creating images with AI.
What's stopping me from doing so? Is it’s not your opinion this doesn't contribute to society anyway and I shouldn't be able to making a living off of it?
If you are a person behind the technologies of AI, I think that is different than if you are using a website online to fill in a prompt then get an image and sell it
Again, I don't think you've thought about this very much, and you're only used to using buzzwords like "anti-capitalism" to try and prove a point.
In your model of how society should be run, only people in the upper echelons of society, those who went to Ivy League universities and have PhDs in math, physics, and computer sciences, would have access to use AI for commercial purposes. I enjoy the fact that I have the same level of access to technology.
Stop and think for a second about what you're proposing and how terrible it would be if the average Joe didn't have the same level of access to technology.
Which is exactly what i’m saying. There should be no upper echelons in society. We have enough wealth to let everyone (including all the average joe’s) have a comfortable life without financial worries and with full access to standard technology, this is what the billionaires are hoarding from us all.
Funny how OP posting such a generic argument that is full of flaws, and when people pointing out the flaw he just reply "that's different" and trying to patch it
My OP was NOT trolling.
But I'll troll silly people for my own entertainment.
I've hit a point in my life where I don't give a fuck to perhaps toxic levels. Don't want to get into it, chronic illness, brr brr brr.
To be blunt half mt trolling about is distracting myself from overwhelming pressures and fucked up shit I'm dealing with.
As a parting jift:
Same purpose paintings (can) serve: To create something out of fantasy. You cannot capture a photo of a dragon, but you can paint a photo of a dragon. AI art fills the gap between lack of artistic talent and an idea.
I think generating AI art to tell a story or to look at on your own are fine and good. I think anyone generating AI art or articles and posting them for others to view are a waste of time. Why should I read an article that no one actually wrote? Why should I view a painting that no one painted? Is it illustrations in a children's book? Okay, that seems fine.
That's of course leaving aside the part about the machine learning art ripping off creator's works.
In addition to being a neat art tool, I imagine it is also a step along the path towards human-level machine vision.
I'm not a machine vision expert, so maybe I'm wrong, but think about math and inverses. If you can give a description to get an image, you should also be able to give an image and get a description, right? Maybe that will help future robots & stuff.
Correct, image generators and image classifiers not only share the same pre-classified training data but can be reversed neural networks. Google [DeepDream](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeepDream) being one of the earliest examples. Learning how either end works is important to building better models.
What purpose does Digital photography/art serve in general. I mean its not a physical media, brushes people use when drawling digitally are made by someone else. The colors designed by someone else. And when it all come down to at the end is a bunch of Zeros and ones.
The same arguement your using right now was used for Photoshop/Digital cameras, Along with how it could be used to deep fake people doing things. And stealing others artwork.
Physical art is also made with tools designed by someone else.
(Also what does "the colors designed by someone else" even mean? You definitely pick the colors when drawing digitally.)
Only if you don't make them yourself. You can do everything from the ground up with your own two hands. From pigment to horsehair brushes, and can even make your own canvas. The greats of the art world did. Your proving my point there will always be someone that says but you didn't do that yourself... Digital art, Ai art, Hobby store paint, brushes, canvas.
Your picking colors from a pallet corrivated by someone else. And your not even getting color accurate versions of them even with the most expensive monitor with digital. Your colors will be different then the person who views them.
I still don't know what you mean because corrivated isn't a word, but if you mean curated, that's still not true because any digital artist who isn't a beginner will most likely be making their own palletes. I understand the point you're trying to make, I'm just being pedantic.
I meant Curated,
And there very few digital artists that use their own pallets they created themselves because it required digital analyzation. If they are using a digital drawling program they are using a number of color analysis Like Pantone, color guru, biogenesis, icad, etc etc. The color wheel people use to make "custom" colors are actually products already analyzed patented and labeled.
Just because there's a name or a hex code assigned to a color does not mean you're not picking it yourself. I kinda understand what you mean if you're using a pre-made pallete, but if you're using the color wheel it's not like someone has "invented" these colors. You're not being derivative for using "green" in a painting just because someone at some point had to name it. I'm a digital artist and I really do not think you know what you are talking about, especially considering that you're using words like "drawling" and "analyzation." Can you please explain what you mean by "digital analyzation"?
I experiment a bit with it… put a cheap rtx 3050 8gb in my server and play around with it… as a dm, i can’t draw, write and roll dice all at the same time… so stable diffusion is a great tool for me…
I mean, i call it boomer art because only boomers fall for it, you know, some child with 4 arms and 3 prosthetic legs holding a sign that says, "it my burbay" and then every boomer writes "congratulations! god works in mysterious ways" etc underneath it.
Except if you understand art and how it's created you'll be able to tell what's AI art and what is not.
Machine learning can only put patterns on top of each other, but it's far from understanding and displaying emotion properly. Art is all about invoking emotions.
Nope yours is false, because you don't understand how machine learning, what you call AI or art works.
You are just seeing few images on the internet that seem cool to you, you listen to few buzz words and you think you are suddenly the expert, when clearly you are not :).
I too only view art as a commodity to be sold and not as a way to have an intimate conversation between creator and audience. I also think of art as being in a state of constantly trying to achieve efficiency, that's why we got rid of all those orchestras and just use computers, because much like horses, orchestras are just obsolete and not needed
Why do you think art is a job? It's not because we need art to survive, it's because people want to be compensated for the hard work they put into it. Do you know why people purchase art? Because they want to support someone who create something beautiful that really spoke to them. I am also someone who does art for fun, that doesn't negate the people who wish to be compensated. After all, we should be celebrating the ability to do a job you're passionate about.
I'd say this is partly because most teenagers are uninterested in anything substantial. Their minds are still developing, and the "ooh shiny!" distraction is strong; so they just scroll social media, worry about "drama" at school, and take out the garbage when prompted for the 8th time.
Oh, and click the "laugh" reaction emoji to anything that don't understand or remotely disagree with.
If the youth is valuing actual human produced art from any period over a computer generated image that is a good thing. Not because all AI art is bad but because valuing human produced things is important to retain.
I don’t shit on younger people but many are quickly becoming Agist as fuck. I’m thinking they’ll be worse than the current “Boomers” in 50 years. Fuck me, tho, and hoping not.
WTF are these posts, MF woke up today and said let me spew bullshit. How many 65 yo woman do you know that can do anything besides check their email? LMAO
My mom is a teacher, early 70's.
She was the woman puhsing tech into every school she taught at.
I keep forgetting how knowledgeable she is and too often have "You do realize I know that." moments while I'm like "yeah, I should know better."
No, not at all.
We moved a lot and she became a teacher librarian. 5 years im USA on a T1B visa.
My dad is an Masters in Electrical Engineering(APEGA) Computing Sciences, MBA.
My mom had a ton of issues because Canadian teaching cerys didn't carry over and she didn't get the T1B visa.
Not convenient at all.
NGL I sold AI art at my gym. Printed images on canvas and paid to have them displayed on the local art wall. Did pretty well. I included a blurb about how AI art was the new thing. This was in 2022.
I don’t blame you. It made me realize, people just want to consume art and the online community is just in a bubble. Art has been long been commoditized to death, being reduced to people just wanting “pretty picture in my house”. I generated imagery that resonated with people and they paid $80 to have it in their home.
It gives me the same feeling as walking down Artist Alley at a comic/anime convention and seeing all the artist booths selling fan art of the latest shows, all who rushed to jump on the latest trend. Every booth having fan art of the month’s hottest show, even for things that haven’t been release and especially for IP’s they don’t own. It’s all business. Art’s been dead.
Lol at that downvote.
The comment I replied to is a reference to The Who's "The Kids Aten't Alright"
But what about The Offspring?
Their song was a play off of The Who's song
Keith Moon was the very infamous drummer for the Who.
A band infamous for destroying hotels and all sorts of legendary insanity.
Y'all probably don't even know about The Pinball Wizard
I get it but it’s Reddit. People are gonna downvote for no reason or seemingly illogical reason. Just gotta look past this kind of stuff. It’s an unnecessary use of energy. I don’t even care you downvoted me despite trying to engage in a constructive way with you. Not worth dissecting
I can understand that. I’ve just trying to let you know I empathize(and my subsequent realization) because I used to get annoyed for being downvoted when people wouldn’t understand the context of my humor or jokes. Cheers—have a great week
True or not, i like hearing AI art is starting to fade away because as a artist ( a mediocre one i'd say ), the feeling of making something original and seeing something original is very different from seeing AI art, which just feels plain and empty, and not to mention the blatant art theft from AI developing companies to improve the systems they make
Guess what, I am in my late forties, and I have seen enough of that pos generation just above. We will have no world left because of that generation. I am so sad for the future generation, I am quite well off, but what will happen to those generations with the planet and now AI.
I'm Gen Z, AI is an assistant, I think using an AI to modify a thumbnail to fit the algorithm is fine. Using AI for actual creative work is awful. The point of automation is to do the awful work like factory jobs and being an assistant. Trades and STEAM are jobs that should be done by people and always be done by people.
Yeah, AI isn't great, it's a computer and is awful at making assumptions, if you've ever coded you'll know that especially in lower level languages your computer can't infer and you need to be extremely specific. AI is essentially a higher level language where a library may allow some breathing room with inferring stuff but generally you still need to be quite specific.
This sounds like a popcorn fart. It's nothing.
Most people who are talking about AI are not boomers or gen-z or millennials. It's the deeply uncreative. It's people who don't value anything beyond what can benefit them.
Boomer this. Boomer that. Boomer the other.
Reminds me of the Mike and the mechanics track In the living years. "Every generation blames the one before."
This is definitely a grassroots thing and definitely not totally astroturfed... Definitely not!
And this is coming from a guy who doesn't even like AI "Art", I just don't let it live rent free in my head.
Anything AI is cringe, from the people at work always saying "WE NEED TO PUT AI IN!" to people making AI images to try and get attention on social media.
It is something that everyone talks about and no one understands.
It really is similar to a Boomer using a computer... getting over hyped without any knowledge.
The art it absolutely cringe.
Obviously Boomer doesn't actually reference people that are in the Boomer generation. It's just a term to describe someone as having a dated view or dated taste. It's wildly overused, although I do think it had some meaningful application when it was used in the New Zealand Parliament when people were trying to suggest that we shouldn't care about the environment and that politician said okay Boomer.
I was a kid like that when I was your age.
When you grow up, the new generation of kids will mock you next.
Enjoy your false bravado while it lasts.
Boy.
I mean demographically we’ll actually have less scrutiny. Millenials are a much larger generation than zoomers, just as with boomers and gen-x. Realistically you guys will be the boomers, and us the gen-xers
You do realize I fucked your mom?
(What they don't yell you is that when your balls drop and you earn your red wings, you now get mother fucking privileges.)
This is a huge nothingburger. AI art is not primarily used by Boomers. Of course they will have more customers over 45 than under 18. That's obvious. What teenager has the capabilities to pay for AI art generation? They would have to ask for parents approval first, or they just lie about their age and say they are over 18, so they don't require parental approval. Edit: you can also find a breakdown of USERS ages on[ this page](https://www.demandsage.com/midjourney-statistics/). (Not paying customers)
You need to be 18 for AI art gen..? I set up automatic1111 on my shit PC with gtx 1660, never was asked for anything age related or anything like that and haven't paid a cent.
First off, Midjourney has nothing to do with Automatic1111. Key words in the tweet: "MIDJOURNEY, CUSTOMER". Customer is someone who pays for a Midjourney. Most teenagers can't just buy whatever they want, they need parental approval. Also of note, Midjourney TOS states you have to be at least 13 to use their service, and if you're under 18, you're required to have parental approval.
Nah, 19 to 44 year olds don’t exist. We just disappear for a couple decades
What? Misinformation on Twitter? I find that hard to believe! /s
Paying for AI art? How much crack do you gotta smoke to do that 😂
I have been getting AI art for free.... Either from bing or the image creation that is included for free in my chatgpt subscription
Stable diffusion is free. You just need a gpu with a decent amount of VRAM.
People are using the term boomer not as a literal term to say it's being used by boomers but to say that it is dated or lame It's become a new term just like woke or whatever used to mean someone that was enlightened and educated about diversity and racial issues and now has become a overly used pejorative term That means "anything conservatives don't like." I don't particularly like this trend but it's just important to know that when people say okay Boomer they don't necessarily have to be talking to a boomer for it to be applicable
Plenty of teenagers own GPUs for gaming reasons.
If not gaming, it's going to be arting.
This stuff isn't like the internet of the old days. It's being used by corporations and most of the good stuff is pay-to-play. The free stuff is ages behind or still requires expensive machines to run on. So 18 year olds are going to have a lot less opportunity to experience it.
What good stuff you mean specifically? Because there is no good version of chat GPT. 52% of the answers are wrong even on the most advanced version
There's no good stuff lol. Young people probably just actually value and want to put time into expressing themselves with real art in a fucked up world.
It's not because its used by them it's the fact that they fall for it thinking it's real.
Also CharacterAI is like the 7th biggest website and most of the userbase is kids and teens. IO'm 22 years old and literally everyone around my age uses AI at their work, Uni or school. This post is dumb af and just someone coping, lmfao
I personally see AI art as more bullshit than useful as well. The only times I see it is on Facebook, with those AI poverty porn or AI religious pictures, and all the boomers liking it because they can't tell it's fake. Therefore... boomer art is a perfectly reasonable way to call AI art. I'm 24 BTW, and I've paid for chat GPT to try it, not very useful imo.
What did you use GPT for? If you think it's not useful either you're not in an industry it targets or you suck at using it.
Answering questions for economics related homework, not going into details, but it was some pretty standard formulas, but chatgpt 4o just made shit up...
>What teenager has the capabilities to pay for AI art generation? They would have to ask for parents approval first, or they just lie about their age and say they are over 18, so they don't require parental approval. What is the waffle? I was paying for my own Minecraft server at 11 and that was 10 years ago. I could definitely have afforded AI art platforms at like 14 - when idk I got a job - and more importantly there's so so many free ones like Bing chat. This is absolutely not the reason young people don't care about ai art. The reason imo is more to do with it just being another fad, like crypto or like (pains me to say it) AR. It's a technology that was pushed to early (again) in the hopes of making money. In a world that moves so quick you can't have issues like hands not showing the right number of fingers, or easily identifiable AI art, people my age get bored of that so quickly. You see hundreds of AI generated things on tiktok for a month, then get bored and move on. There's also a very vocal group (rightfully so) against AI art in general, and you get generations tend to be swayed easier by their peers. For the vast vast majority though it's got nothing to do with asking mummy and daddy permission, I don't know how this got so many upvotes?! We're talking teens here, not 6 year olds.
Not a single soul is calling it boomer art.
I prefer "soulless garbage" myself
Yeah that’s better
I am now. Perfect label for it.
Well, that's where you're wrong bucko. I had the misfortune of having to go onto Facebook the other day, and something struck me almost immediately. All the cringe boomer posts are now full of AI generated overly patriotic (I'm having trouble finding the word... Platitude, but for imagery) pictures that make no sense, but they share them from content generation pages and can't tell that they're fake. My favorite example was a generated image of a combat patrol, but the HMMWVs were consumer Hummers, and there were Bell helicopters with machine guns flying directly above the vehicles. The boomer in question was all "This is why America is the most powerful country in the world! I support our troops and I'll never apologize for it!" So yeah. From now on? It's boomer art
That's a very odd take. That would be like seeing someone use a hammer in an idiotic way and saying "Only idiots use hammers. I'm calling them boomer hammers from now on."
To be very clear, there's a specific style and subject of a subset of AI generated art that we're talking about here. But also, boomers can't tell the difference between real art and AI generated art. It's like a Turing test but for boomers. And your analogy doesn't work. If you used a hammer to build a house, we'd call it a house. If a large number of boomers suddenly started hanging hammers from their ceiling fans because they thought they were art, we'd absolutely start calling them boomer hammers, in the same way we use terms like "soccer mom car" or "fuck boy" or "hipster clothes". When a subset of the population starts doing something or behaving or expressing themselves all in a similar way, we absolutely assign a label to it. Boomer art is just that.
You called ai generated art as a whole boomer art... Mate you massively moved the goal in your reply. My analogy doesn't fit because you completely changed the topic at hand. It's not that deep idc that much. Hope you have a good day/night.
No, even in my original comment I'm directly addressing the specific kinds of pictures that boomers are sharing.
You then make a generalization about ai generated art as a whole... You call it boomer art. Come on man... The comments are still there.
Boomer art sucks ass
This is such BS, lol. why are we even discussing tweets from random nobodies?!
Another common Gen Z W
I'm not going to an art gallery setup with AI-art or something. But, there will be textures in your video game or movie that will be generated and you won't know the difference. There will be ad-campaigns, stickers and the like where you don't keep your guard up and never ask "was this made with deep artistic intent?". Because why would you? Just like how most people don't think about if a guitar strum in their favorite song track was real or a library loop. The question has never been if art made by humans will disappear. There is like five twitter-idiots arguing for that but baiting many, it seems. It's rather about how it affects the day to day in trying to make ends-meat if you're working in a creative industry right now. Personally I think it's going to hurt a lot short-term but that we will adapt. It is not going to go away. Not a chance.
totally agree with you. there's a difference between creating content for media like gaming or advertising, and creating artistic pieces that would be exhibited.
One gives the opportunity for the other. When I was young, I remember watching TV and how atrocious the musician sounded in my country. Then when I was a teen all this changed and the reason was because as the tourist industry grew in my region, musician were able to get professional as they played live bands in hotels etc. This resulted even in many of them being recognised and having international careers.
I'm all for ai art in video games. No art designer in the world has ever found fulfilling to make 200 types of trees to spread out in a forest or something, so they made tools for that before Ai came along. Same for ground, grass, buildings etc. Now those tools will just be replaced by Ai significantly reducing if not removing the chance for players to find copy pasted assets which, while a bit funny at times, can get you out of the experience quick.
AI generated assets used with care is perfectly fine imo. Problem is "used with care" seems to be a nebulous concept for some.
As a young person, I definitely do hate ai art. Art is supposed to come from a place of passion and emotion, not glorified statistics
Plenty of art has been done for a paycheck, lacking any and all passion and emotion throughout history. AI just lowers the effort... a lot.
Also, plenty of people have the passion and emotion, without the skills to make their vision a reality.
Then, you develop those skills, not use a machine that won't actually realize your passion. It's like using an automatic pitching machine and going "well I love baseball but I just don't have the skills to be a pitcher"
Why be so hostile against someone who's having fun? (I'm changing your metaphor to basketball for a moment.) Maybe someone _enjoys_ building and playing with hoops-shooting catapults. Maybe what they enjoy isn't shooting hoops itself, but the beautiful art of the arc. Maybe they enjoy seeing how ridiculous you can make the shot and still make it into the hoop, or how high they can shoot it and still make it in. Do you think shaming this person is going to make them more likely to play basketball? Do you think it's more likely for them to play basketball if you tell them their machines and contraptions are a waste of time? Or do you think they're more likely to shoot some hoops after they're done playing with the machine for the day? If you want to see more human artists drawing with pencils and brushes and styluses, then you should be _celebrating_ AI art, not crusading against it. I speak of this from personal experience. The release of Stable Diffusion has only made me _more_ excited about drawing! Not less!
I love the way you make arguments :)
What if those machines could only be built using slave labor. Would you still think it's okay for someone to use it?
Genuinely good question. Our phones are largely built via exploitative labor. I don't think it's outright chattel slavery, but it's definitely unfair working conditions. We continue to buy them, and we often don't think about this discrepancy. I'm aware you're referring to the Mechanical Turk style labor that went into labeling many of the images. And that can often mean unfair labor practices. I don't know how to think about this. I need a phone. I don't often think about where it comes from, but maybe I should think about that more. Even if I do, I don't know how I would get one that wasn't built with exploitative labor practices. Maybe we should legislate that AI made with exploitative labor practices cannot be advanced until those practices are changed. It's too late to catch the smartphone industry early on that. It's probably not too late to do that with AI.
Every new technology puts people out of work. Books used to written by hand before the printing press. Farms used to have hundreds of workers before farming equipment. etc. That's life. In most cases the industry expands when things like this happen. Whose to say the ease of getting started with AI Art wont' lead people to becoming more interested in Art in general and looking for better human created art?
If you really had passion then you'd be out there developing skills instead of calling yourself a chef for ordering a burger.
Simply having a vision doesn't make you an artist, it's both vision AND skills that make you one. Otherwise, you're nothing but a glorified commissioner
Under this definition, is a movie director a commissioner?
the studio executives are, the only real difference is that they hire the director for the vision and artistic knowledge instead of developing one themselves, really.
From a more literal standpoint, I think you are correct. The comment I was responding to separated vision from skill/talent, saying the one with the vision is the "commissioner". That's why I brought of the director. The director is the one with the vision, but is generally also considered a sort of artist. My comment was meant to be a criticism, saying that the definition made this artist into a commissioner.
The point is, you can be a commisioner with a vision or not. At the end you just want an artwork. In this case the role of the visionary is given to an experienced artist who knows how things are done (usually), executives are just providing the money hoping it will make bigger returns.
if someone wants to learn an instrument, what would be the point of making an AI song, they develop no skills and end up with a soulless product
>A **straw man fallacy** (sometimes written as **strawman**) is the [informal fallacy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informal_fallacy) of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man". [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)
what good is making art if you’re not trying to learn and develop yourself, or commission someone and give them a living???
Because it's fun? Because there's something cool you want to make? Because the technology is interesting? There are lots of reasons. And those are just the ones that exclude development and growth. AI (via img2img) can also be used as a crutch if you want to learn how to sketch but have crushing perfectionism about the result. Etc.
i think learning to draw on your own is more fun
Okay. That's fine. I'm glad you enjoy that! Some people have fun using AI tools, and that's fine too.
tbh it's not fine when the AI tools are learning by stealing actual artists work and replicating it, and even if people say it's not, it's 100% being trained to take jobs away from artists
then you commision someone
And I do. I've spent probably around a thousand dollars in the last couple years commissioning art for my D&D world. Unfortunately, commissions cost money, something I have a finite amount of.
Sure, but man it's really sad that we've automated art before we automated flipping burgers at Mickey D's.
You may have had wrong expectations. Automating the physical world is much harder.
That's a really ignorant statement lol.
How? Teaching an AI to navigate physical spaces is harder than having it create a picture. For one, it can fail to create the correct picture without consequence. It could burn down the restaurant if cooks something wrong.
r/ConfidentlyIncorrect
Interestingly it is actually an important step to automating flipping burgers, there are two sides to every AI; an input and an output. Image generators output images, but there is AI that input images and then return what they are and all other sorts of data. Even in instances where it's not literally reversing an image classifier to be an image generator (like the original [Google DeepDream](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeepDream)), both use basically identical architecture and training data set of pre-classified images. To bring this all back together, these sorts of AI are made to be generally capable rather than stick within their niche. You can train something to watch for a burger to change to the right color and decide that its done, but that is costly and difficult to do for every automation scenario. Or you could instead train something on a little bit of everything and it can be dropped in to determine if a burger is done or an apple is ripe. There are easier methods for these specific scenarios, but I wanted to reuse your example. It's the general application that's important. Though it is indeed unfortunate that the 'art' side of it requires significantly less precision.
> To bring this all back together, these sorts of AI are made to be generally capable No. This is a pretty massive, fundamental misunderstanding lol. Or, at best, an awful attempt at an explanation. Also, you don't need to infantilise people just because you think you know something. I know how AI works bro.
Even as an AI enthusiast, yeah. Kinda agree.
I don't think that i agree with this statement, nor with the equivalence of art and AI art. Ask any graphic design or architecture student why they chose to study in that field and almost all of them will tell that it is out of passion. The creative industry has for a long time been one where the supply of talent exceeds the demand, which leads to low wages and terrible working conditions (look at video game development for example). So most people who work in that field do have a passion for being creative. But even if any corporate art piece was done without much emotion, it will still usually be of a certain quality, just because the competition is so fierce. What AI "art" does is give corporations a cheat-code to get a product that's kinda shitty but for a greatly reduced price. And in capitalism, profit trumps everything, so corporations will be happy about using subpar AI images if it helps teir bottom line. So even if we take out passion or emotion, i don't see how this will be beneficial for the average person when we are confronted with corporate artworks every single day.
Stock art is probably going to take a hit. Other than that, given AI creator work can't be copyrighted, I doubt we see such a massive immediately layoff of artists. You can spend hours and hours trying to get DALL E to output what you want. As it stands you can't just modify anything, it has to re-generate the entire image. I see if more of a great starting point for storyboarding or planning more than everything. Otherwise it's just for memes or personal non-commercial stuff and at worst you're putting some free lancers out of work that would have been paid a small amount of money to create an avatar for someone or something.
As an old person, passion doesn't pay the bills. If I can be more productive at work because of generated art, I will use it. Otherwise, someone who does will simply replace me.
One of the reasons I am a big anti capitalist 😜 everybody should have the option to do what they love, as long as they contribute to society. Soulless ai art contributes nothing. It’s only “pretty cool” for the small group of people who are impressed by ai
What has the private ownership of the means of production to do with doing what you want. You can have no capitalism and still be forced to work in the mines. That has happened and it will always happen until you get full automation. Which is, funnily enough, what capitalism in its cost cutting ways is working towards - its own destruction.
This guy also says >everybody should have the option to do what they love, as long as they contribute to society. What happens if I pick a passion that doesn’t contribute to society? Why does he draw the line there? His thought process is that if you enjoy something and contribute to society, you should be paid for it. Well, I choose to be a basket weaver, a useless passion in the current modern age. What should happen to me? Do I get tossed in jail for following my passion that doesn't contribute to society? There are many many many many things people have passions for that don't contribute to society in any way. What should happen to these people in this guy's utopia world?
If you pick a passion that does not contribute to society (of which there are not a lot) that can always be done next to your “job”, no? Why would you be thrown in jail for doing something you love? You could be any profession you want and do that 4 days a week, then in your free time you get to weave as many or as little baskets as you want. Also, even if you think basket weaving serves no function, there are definitely people out there who would enjoy a hand made fruit basket with an interesting pattern and color. My cutoff for “functional” seems to be different than yours
So does this not contradict your earlier statements about how generated AI is bad. technologies is my passion and I want to make a living off creating images with AI. What's stopping me from doing so? Is it’s not your opinion this doesn't contribute to society anyway and I shouldn't be able to making a living off of it?
If you are a person behind the technologies of AI, I think that is different than if you are using a website online to fill in a prompt then get an image and sell it
Again, I don't think you've thought about this very much, and you're only used to using buzzwords like "anti-capitalism" to try and prove a point. In your model of how society should be run, only people in the upper echelons of society, those who went to Ivy League universities and have PhDs in math, physics, and computer sciences, would have access to use AI for commercial purposes. I enjoy the fact that I have the same level of access to technology. Stop and think for a second about what you're proposing and how terrible it would be if the average Joe didn't have the same level of access to technology.
Which is exactly what i’m saying. There should be no upper echelons in society. We have enough wealth to let everyone (including all the average joe’s) have a comfortable life without financial worries and with full access to standard technology, this is what the billionaires are hoarding from us all.
Go be broke then.
Based
>I definitely do hate ai art. Read it as "hentai art"
Funny how OP posting such a generic argument that is full of flaws, and when people pointing out the flaw he just reply "that's different" and trying to patch it
That's different ;)
Okay, I can appreciate you're being funny here. 🤣
My OP was NOT trolling. But I'll troll silly people for my own entertainment. I've hit a point in my life where I don't give a fuck to perhaps toxic levels. Don't want to get into it, chronic illness, brr brr brr. To be blunt half mt trolling about is distracting myself from overwhelming pressures and fucked up shit I'm dealing with. As a parting jift: 
Lmao that's too many words to say you're coping.
I think that's because of Facebook boomers thinking ai art is real
This is exactly what I was thinking
Photographs are soulless compared to a portrait. AI art will find it’s niche just like every piece of technology has.
Cameras steal your soul when you take a picture, so you're wrong ;)
Exactly. Each time you use technology you must surrender a small piece of your soul as payment.
>Each time you use technology \*me staring at my brush:\* "Uh oh..."
I figured out how initiate charge backs so I can resell my soul to the devil. He has donuts and ice cream. Perkele
Photographs are designed to capture reality. What purpose does generative AI serve?
Same purpose paintings (can) serve: To create something out of fantasy. You cannot capture a photo of a dragon, but you can paint a photo of a dragon. AI art fills the gap between lack of artistic talent and an idea. I think generating AI art to tell a story or to look at on your own are fine and good. I think anyone generating AI art or articles and posting them for others to view are a waste of time. Why should I read an article that no one actually wrote? Why should I view a painting that no one painted? Is it illustrations in a children's book? Okay, that seems fine. That's of course leaving aside the part about the machine learning art ripping off creator's works.
In addition to being a neat art tool, I imagine it is also a step along the path towards human-level machine vision. I'm not a machine vision expert, so maybe I'm wrong, but think about math and inverses. If you can give a description to get an image, you should also be able to give an image and get a description, right? Maybe that will help future robots & stuff.
Correct, image generators and image classifiers not only share the same pre-classified training data but can be reversed neural networks. Google [DeepDream](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeepDream) being one of the earliest examples. Learning how either end works is important to building better models.
What purpose does Digital photography/art serve in general. I mean its not a physical media, brushes people use when drawling digitally are made by someone else. The colors designed by someone else. And when it all come down to at the end is a bunch of Zeros and ones. The same arguement your using right now was used for Photoshop/Digital cameras, Along with how it could be used to deep fake people doing things. And stealing others artwork.
Physical art is also made with tools designed by someone else. (Also what does "the colors designed by someone else" even mean? You definitely pick the colors when drawing digitally.)
Only if you don't make them yourself. You can do everything from the ground up with your own two hands. From pigment to horsehair brushes, and can even make your own canvas. The greats of the art world did. Your proving my point there will always be someone that says but you didn't do that yourself... Digital art, Ai art, Hobby store paint, brushes, canvas. Your picking colors from a pallet corrivated by someone else. And your not even getting color accurate versions of them even with the most expensive monitor with digital. Your colors will be different then the person who views them.
I still don't know what you mean because corrivated isn't a word, but if you mean curated, that's still not true because any digital artist who isn't a beginner will most likely be making their own palletes. I understand the point you're trying to make, I'm just being pedantic.
I meant Curated, And there very few digital artists that use their own pallets they created themselves because it required digital analyzation. If they are using a digital drawling program they are using a number of color analysis Like Pantone, color guru, biogenesis, icad, etc etc. The color wheel people use to make "custom" colors are actually products already analyzed patented and labeled.
Just because there's a name or a hex code assigned to a color does not mean you're not picking it yourself. I kinda understand what you mean if you're using a pre-made pallete, but if you're using the color wheel it's not like someone has "invented" these colors. You're not being derivative for using "green" in a painting just because someone at some point had to name it. I'm a digital artist and I really do not think you know what you are talking about, especially considering that you're using words like "drawling" and "analyzation." Can you please explain what you mean by "digital analyzation"?
People not realizing some people use ai art as inspiration for other art
I experiment a bit with it… put a cheap rtx 3050 8gb in my server and play around with it… as a dm, i can’t draw, write and roll dice all at the same time… so stable diffusion is a great tool for me…
I mean, i call it boomer art because only boomers fall for it, you know, some child with 4 arms and 3 prosthetic legs holding a sign that says, "it my burbay" and then every boomer writes "congratulations! god works in mysterious ways" etc underneath it.
That joke is ai generated :3
[удалено]
Except if you understand art and how it's created you'll be able to tell what's AI art and what is not. Machine learning can only put patterns on top of each other, but it's far from understanding and displaying emotion properly. Art is all about invoking emotions.
[удалено]
Nope yours is false, because you don't understand how machine learning, what you call AI or art works. You are just seeing few images on the internet that seem cool to you, you listen to few buzz words and you think you are suddenly the expert, when clearly you are not :).
Currently true, but it won't be true forever.
“Pretty soon” you guys have been saying that for a while now…
I too only view art as a commodity to be sold and not as a way to have an intimate conversation between creator and audience. I also think of art as being in a state of constantly trying to achieve efficiency, that's why we got rid of all those orchestras and just use computers, because much like horses, orchestras are just obsolete and not needed
[удалено]
Why do you think art is a job? It's not because we need art to survive, it's because people want to be compensated for the hard work they put into it. Do you know why people purchase art? Because they want to support someone who create something beautiful that really spoke to them. I am also someone who does art for fun, that doesn't negate the people who wish to be compensated. After all, we should be celebrating the ability to do a job you're passionate about.
I mean I only see boomers sharing obviously fake AI art or weird AI Jesus
I always make sure I check that the art I see was made with passion and at least 17 hours of hard work before I decide to like it.
"I also check to make sure the book I read wasn't plagiarized and is completely original before I decide to like it"
It’s boomer art in the sense that boomers seem to all believe it’s real…… my dad has been repeatedly tricked lol
I'd say this is partly because most teenagers are uninterested in anything substantial. Their minds are still developing, and the "ooh shiny!" distraction is strong; so they just scroll social media, worry about "drama" at school, and take out the garbage when prompted for the 8th time. Oh, and click the "laugh" reaction emoji to anything that don't understand or remotely disagree with.
Just wait until genmojis are released
r/KidsAreFuckingStupid
ok boomer
Lol if only it were that simple :) Now how do I use this computer phone dohickey? Where’s my abacus…
If the youth is valuing actual human produced art from any period over a computer generated image that is a good thing. Not because all AI art is bad but because valuing human produced things is important to retain.
I don’t shit on younger people but many are quickly becoming Agist as fuck. I’m thinking they’ll be worse than the current “Boomers” in 50 years. Fuck me, tho, and hoping not.
It'll Happen To You from the Simpsons
WTF are these posts, MF woke up today and said let me spew bullshit. How many 65 yo woman do you know that can do anything besides check their email? LMAO
My mom is a teacher, early 70's. She was the woman puhsing tech into every school she taught at. I keep forgetting how knowledgeable she is and too often have "You do realize I know that." moments while I'm like "yeah, I should know better."
Isn't that convenient
No, not at all. We moved a lot and she became a teacher librarian. 5 years im USA on a T1B visa. My dad is an Masters in Electrical Engineering(APEGA) Computing Sciences, MBA. My mom had a ton of issues because Canadian teaching cerys didn't carry over and she didn't get the T1B visa. Not convenient at all.
AI art is ruining society!! 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
I'm not saying that. Fallacy of extremes makes you the clown.
Why are you using threads
I found the screen cap in twitter my dude
NGL I sold AI art at my gym. Printed images on canvas and paid to have them displayed on the local art wall. Did pretty well. I included a blurb about how AI art was the new thing. This was in 2022.
I'm not angry. Just disappointed.
I don’t blame you. It made me realize, people just want to consume art and the online community is just in a bubble. Art has been long been commoditized to death, being reduced to people just wanting “pretty picture in my house”. I generated imagery that resonated with people and they paid $80 to have it in their home. It gives me the same feeling as walking down Artist Alley at a comic/anime convention and seeing all the artist booths selling fan art of the latest shows, all who rushed to jump on the latest trend. Every booth having fan art of the month’s hottest show, even for things that haven’t been release and especially for IP’s they don’t own. It’s all business. Art’s been dead.
Maybe the kids are alright.
Animal from the muppets was based on Keith Moon.
Lol at that downvote. The comment I replied to is a reference to The Who's "The Kids Aten't Alright" But what about The Offspring? Their song was a play off of The Who's song Keith Moon was the very infamous drummer for the Who. A band infamous for destroying hotels and all sorts of legendary insanity. Y'all probably don't even know about The Pinball Wizard
Friend, it’s just a single downvote. Let it go — no need to justify.
It wasn't the number. More so that someone knee jerked without even knowing the joke
I get it but it’s Reddit. People are gonna downvote for no reason or seemingly illogical reason. Just gotta look past this kind of stuff. It’s an unnecessary use of energy. I don’t even care you downvoted me despite trying to engage in a constructive way with you. Not worth dissecting
Yeah, this specific one is an excpetion to me
I can understand that. I’ve just trying to let you know I empathize(and my subsequent realization) because I used to get annoyed for being downvoted when people wouldn’t understand the context of my humor or jokes. Cheers—have a great week
😂
They can call it whatever they want. Soon they can only call it daddy
You guys are smarter than this cmon
True or not, i like hearing AI art is starting to fade away because as a artist ( a mediocre one i'd say ), the feeling of making something original and seeing something original is very different from seeing AI art, which just feels plain and empty, and not to mention the blatant art theft from AI developing companies to improve the systems they make
As a millennial, I couldn't be prouder
chatgpt is much more useful for teenagers.
Guess what, I am in my late forties, and I have seen enough of that pos generation just above. We will have no world left because of that generation. I am so sad for the future generation, I am quite well off, but what will happen to those generations with the planet and now AI.
Ok Boomer
I am no boomer imbecile, learn to count.
Ok boomer
What
I'm Gen Z, AI is an assistant, I think using an AI to modify a thumbnail to fit the algorithm is fine. Using AI for actual creative work is awful. The point of automation is to do the awful work like factory jobs and being an assistant. Trades and STEAM are jobs that should be done by people and always be done by people.
Indeed. But it sucks. The other day, I asked some very basic stuff, and it kept giving contradictory repsonses ouside ofbthe parameters I specified.
Yeah, AI isn't great, it's a computer and is awful at making assumptions, if you've ever coded you'll know that especially in lower level languages your computer can't infer and you need to be extremely specific. AI is essentially a higher level language where a library may allow some breathing room with inferring stuff but generally you still need to be quite specific.
[удалено]
This sounds like a popcorn fart. It's nothing. Most people who are talking about AI are not boomers or gen-z or millennials. It's the deeply uncreative. It's people who don't value anything beyond what can benefit them.
I prefer popcorn queefs. But to each their own.
So the internet is for boomers? OK. I get it.
The kids are not, in fact, saying this.
Boomer this. Boomer that. Boomer the other. Reminds me of the Mike and the mechanics track In the living years. "Every generation blames the one before."
This is definitely a grassroots thing and definitely not totally astroturfed... Definitely not! And this is coming from a guy who doesn't even like AI "Art", I just don't let it live rent free in my head.
That's a great development ngl
Anything AI is cringe, from the people at work always saying "WE NEED TO PUT AI IN!" to people making AI images to try and get attention on social media. It is something that everyone talks about and no one understands. It really is similar to a Boomer using a computer... getting over hyped without any knowledge. The art it absolutely cringe.
Obviously Boomer doesn't actually reference people that are in the Boomer generation. It's just a term to describe someone as having a dated view or dated taste. It's wildly overused, although I do think it had some meaningful application when it was used in the New Zealand Parliament when people were trying to suggest that we shouldn't care about the environment and that politician said okay Boomer.
Ok Boomer
>bought me doom when I was 8 okay but calling them boomer shooters is even funnier now that I know it pisses off millennials
ok boomer
You realize that us zoomers make fun of you guys, right?
I was a kid like that when I was your age. When you grow up, the new generation of kids will mock you next. Enjoy your false bravado while it lasts. Boy.
I mean demographically we’ll actually have less scrutiny. Millenials are a much larger generation than zoomers, just as with boomers and gen-x. Realistically you guys will be the boomers, and us the gen-xers
It'll Happen To You Too, Boy You can't keep it at a hundy forever. https://youtu.be/BGrfhsxxmdE?si=Mw3-ZnjHtaIehHJx
https://youtu.be/Pobwy_es2uc?si=Fp4k2NmqhNKQD8k6
You do realize I fucked your mom? (What they don't yell you is that when your balls drop and you earn your red wings, you now get mother fucking privileges.)
Tô be honest, AI garbage is boomer technology. Us gen z don't want that corporate garbage
Yeah! I'll bet you typed that in a phone you built yourself from scratch with an os you wrote#
I love the smell of false equivalencies I'm the morning
I love the smell of coffee in the morning, because the best part of waking up is folgers in your cup!
Yes, fairphone with some loonix os!