• pewter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Smart washing machines are a disappointment. They solve very few of the problems I care about as a greedy person.

      I don’t need alerts on my phone when my clothes are done washing. I can manually set a water level.

      What would be cool is putting your dirty clothes in a machine and coming back to a pile of clean, dry, folded laundry.

      • suction@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I once had such a device from ACME but one time when I had to chase away a coyote while on E, I left it on and it folded all my stuff 1000 times into tiny dots.

  • gmtom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Yet again artists have the most braindead possible take on AI.

    Like I seriously dont understand how even “not a computer person” people dont understand that making a plug in for photoshop or an app that turn you into an anime character is completely fucking different to building a robot that does your chores for you AND that we already have robots that do your fucking dishes and laundry for you.

    • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Let me frame this discussion in a different light.

      Why are we spending billions of dollars and countless hours of labour developing software that generates images, something that is fundamentally pointless for any actual product application outside of maybe prototyping stuff?

      The whole point of art is human expression and experience, why are we putting all of this experience in a blender and putting it into a machine learning algorithm just to pump out rainbow slop?

      Sure, on some level I appreciate the concept of the tech overall and there was a time where I thought it was cool and could lead to something new… what ends up happening though, is just giving idiots with businesses degrees more reasons to wring everything of substance from culture.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        generates images, something that is fundamentally pointless for any actual product application outside of maybe prototyping stuff?

        What? You’re legitimately arguing that generating images has no applications? Thats a pretty hot take.

        why are we putting all of this experience in a blender and putting it into a machine learning algorithm just to pump out rainbow slop?

        Again, a very… interesting take.

        So take an example. You are a solo game dev, you’re good at programming and game design, but you’re not an artist and you need art for your game. So you can either invest a couple thousand hours of your time to learn to do it yourself, or you can spend money you might not have to get someone to do it for you, or now, you can have AI generate the art for you.

        AI makes art near infinitely more accessible for people, which is objectively a good thing, but people like you want to gatekeep it for arbitrary reasons.

        and if the whole point of art is human expression like you say, well AI art doesnt stop you from creating your own art now does it? So why do you have beef with it?

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          You are a solo game dev, you’re good at programming and game design, but you’re not an artist and you need art for your game.

          You cannot be a gamedev without being an artist. Full stop. You might not have drawing skills, you might not have 3d skills, you might not have musical skills, and you still can produce a great game, but that’s because the art in games is more than than those things. They’re secondary to the experience same as set design is secondary in theatre, a great play will rivet an audience if you stage it before a blank wall.

          AI makes art near infinitely more accessible for people

          No: It makes certain specialised subskills more accessible. AI can generate a song to you, you still need to know which song fits your game. It can generate some pixels for you, you still need to work it into a coherent whole that has the impact you’re looking for. It cannot write a play for you that you could stage before a blank wall.

          • gmtom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            You cannot be a gamedev without being an artist.

            This is just gatekeeping nonsense

            Seriously how does your head hold “good at game design” and “not an artist” at the same time without imploding.

            Because thats me. I design and code games, but im not a good enough artist to make the textures or models. So I either have to but premade assets or hire artists to do the work for me. I dont understand why you think this is a contradiction, other than you just gatekeeping for no reason.

            No: It makes certain specialised subskills more accessible

            And thus makes are more accessible.

            • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              So I either have to but premade assets or hire artists to do the work for me.

              And by using AI you do neither of those things, and devalue the work of those who do make those things.

              • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                You’re not wrong, but honestly I cbf to blow my entire savings account on a project that isn’t guaranteed to get a good ROI or get me hired somewhere.

                It’s not that I’m unsympathetic for artists, I just don’t have the “value” to give to those artists in the first place. But nonetheless, projects need to be fleshed out one way or another, and programmer art doesn’t cut it.

                • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I find that fair actually (maybe if I was a visual artist I’d feel differently) - I can at least respect that you are willing to acknowledge that even if you have your reasons, it’s still a devaluation.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              This is just gatekeeping nonsense

              Nope it’s like saying “you cannot be a gardener without knowing about plants”. Games are art. To produce them, you have to be an artist. If you produce games, you are an artist. You might be a brilliant or shoddy artist, formally educated, self-taught, conservative or avant-garde, but you are, by definition, an artist.

              Because thats me. I design and code games, but im not a good enough artist to make the textures or models.

              If you understand game design then you should understand how it’s art.

              Have a look at Dwarf Fortress. How many textures and models in that one?

              …if you know game design, have no other art skills, and no team, there’s one choice you should make before all others: Do you want to get into creating that kind of stuff, or do you want to make the lack of those things a style? Maybe even an expression in itself. It’s going to be the one or the other, so make it consciously, and informed, ideally after having explored both sides a bit, learned enough to know what you don’t know, practised enough to see what you’d need to practice to get results you’d like.

              In case you think “I’m just going to throw AI images at my VN” – valid choice. But be aware that without any experience in creating picture media yourself you have no artistic eye for them, and can’t judge the quality of the AI output, and probably be unaware of the artistic possibilities inherent in lightening, choice of colour schemes, etc. No you don’t need to be able to paint everything yourself, but there’s still a baseline of skills necessary to use AI in a capacity that’s more than prompting “big bazongaz plz”. I don’t doubt that you can train that eye while hitting generate over and over, as long as you’re critical enough, but spending some time with a youtube tutorial and actual pencil and paper, or actual blender and virtual clay, will teach you a lot more in a much shorter time-frame. AI is good at dazzling the untrained eye.

              • gmtom@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Nope

                Yes, actually, someone arbitrarily deciding what makes someone an artist is by definition gatekeeping.

                Have a look at Dwarf Fortress. How many textures and models

                Quite a lot? This it has lots of art in it? Its just pixel art? Youre not making the point you think you’re making there.

                …if you know game design, have no other art skills, and no team…

                This whole paragraph wasnt really relevant to the conversation so im just moving past it if thats okay?

                In case you think “I’m just going to throw AI images at my VN” – valid choice.

                This is a false dichotomy. Your options are not either put in the effort with traditional art or lazily throw any random AI generated images at your game. You can put time and effort into AI images, to make them have a consistent style and to actually fit what are trying to make. The latest background im making for my game, for example, has taken me well over an hour already and its not quite finished, but its still orders of magnitude faster and better than if I drew it myself

                Which is the entire point of my comment. If I had to rely on my own artistic skill or have to pay money I dont have to get art made, then I simply would not have been able to make the game I want to make. Even if I did what you suggested and designed around my lack of artistic skill, that would be a different game than the one I wanted to make. Thats why im saying AI art is a good thing and makes art more accessible. I simply would not be making my game, expressing my creativity and enjoying myself if it wasnt for the ability to generate AI art pieces.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Quite a lot? This it has lots of art in it?

                  Zero. Dwarf fortress has zero textures and models, at least the base version that generated the cult following, by now there’s some extensions. It’s rendering to console, not with some 3d API, how would it even use those textures and models? It also doesn’t contain pixel art (past the intro screen) same as a street map is not line art.

                  Seeing that you got such a basic thing completely wrong I do not believe you for one second that you’re anywhere close to being a gamedev. Or even programmer. Maybe you’re a hobbyist trying to write your first game, in that case be aware that your first ten are going to suck get them out of your system as quickly as possible, don’t settle. Move quickly and abandon things.

                  You can put time and effort into AI images, to make them have a consistent style and to actually fit what are trying to make.

                  Nothing I said contradicts that. That time and effort, to make it fit what you’re trying to make, is an artistic endeavour, all I did was give pointers on how to get better at that stuff.

                  Even if I did what you suggested and designed around my lack of artistic skill, that would be a different game than the one I wanted to make.

                  That’s not what I suggested. What I suggested was making a conscious, deliberate, informed, choice. Not saying “I want to make a science-based dragon MMO with photorealistic graphics” but “Here’s my options, here’s what I can do, here’s what I can learn in a reasonable amount of time, let’s see what option I like best”. Make a decision matrix if you have to.

                  expressing my creativity and enjoying myself

                  One thing art is not about is enjoyment. I mean it can come with the process but the opposite can be true as well.

          • papertowels@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            No: It makes certain specialised subskills more accessible. AI can generate a song to you, you still need to know which song fits your game.

            Okay so at this point it’s sounding like an issue of semantics - you’re clearly saying that artists can use AI to help their tasking.

            I believe the other guy your responding to defines artist as someone who is able to create without AI.

            Y’all are hung up over what the definition of “artist” is, but you’re in agreement that generative ai can help those who are less skilled in the production of art.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I believe the other guy your responding to defines artist as someone who is able to create without AI.

              I’m not disagreeing with their assessment. If you can’t create art without AI, you won’t be able to create it with AI because you lack the very basic skills of being an artist. Art is not about the medium that art is expressed in, and having help with that medium doesn’t make the message art if it wasn’t art in the first place.

              Y’all are hung up over what the definition of “artist” is, but you’re in agreement that generative ai can help those who are less skilled in the production of art.

              No. I’m saying it can help those who are less skilled in the production of a particular medium to produce that medium. You still need to be able to artistically judge that medium. You still have to put the art in. It doesn’t come out of the AI, you have to add it in the way that you’re employing it.

              • papertowels@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                You still need to be able to artistically judge that medium.

                That makes sense! I’d guess that the other guy agrees with this sentiment - their definition seems to center around art enabling the production process.

                It’s been a while since I’ve used it, but when I first started playing around with stable diffusion, the results were far from perfect. I’d have to regenerate segments multiple times, go back in with manual image editing, etc. before I would have something I was happy with. Generative models definitely aren’t “push button, receive art”. On the other hand, I’ve gotten a few pieces I rather enjoy, but I’ve had very little artistic training, so I’m grateful.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I’d have to […] go back in with […] editing, etc. before I would have something I was happy with.

                  There. Artistry. The tension between vision and perception, the space of choices that has to be navigated.

                  Most people’s vision when using SD is limited to some thematic idea and a pedestrian sense of aesthetics once they get something that even remotely hits both aspects they post it and call it art that’s a) not actually making choices and b) the reason why so much AI-generated stuff out there is barrel bottom at best.

        • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          What? You’re legitimately arguing that generating images has no applications? Thats a pretty hot take.

          If you want a good and meaningful end product, yeah.

          If you don’t care about the end product or it’s something that was going to be meaningless from the start, like corporate art, I guess it works.

          So you can either invest a couple thousand hours of your time to learn to do it yourself, or you can spend money you might not have to get someone to do it for you, or now, you can have AI generate the art for you.

          If you want your game to be a good game, you’ll have to invest something into the art, you don’t have to be a master artist to make a good game with good art.

          AI makes art near infinitely more accessible for people, which is objectively a good thing, but people like you want to gatekeep it for arbitrary reasons.

          AI doesn’t make art accessible to people, it makes pretty images accessible.

          I am not gatekeeping anything, the things that a machine learning algorithm creates can never be art, and if you want to use it for any project you care about, you are making a mistake.

          and if the whole point of art is human expression like you say, well AI art doesnt stop you from creating your own art now does it? So why do you have beef with it?

          What I’m capable of is completely irrelevant to what I care about, I want people to create cool and meaningful pieces of art, and AI generated images ruin that.

          As I said before, you’re taking all of that expression and experience, blending it together, and what comes out has nothing in it, it’s completely empty of any thought or intent behind it.

          I don’t want a world where huge amounts of the stuff we see is empty slop, I like art, and this stuff is a threat to the potential of so many artists.

          Off the top of my head I could name games like Undertale, that were created by people who were completely new to game dev.

          If Toby Fox decided to use AI to generate all of the imagery in that game, it would be nowhere near the art piece it is. But he didn’t, he got an artist to work with him to create the vision he wanted for the game.

          • gmtom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            I am not gatekeeping anything, the things that a machine learning algorithm creates can never be art,

            “im not gatekeeping, but im deciding what counts as art and what doesnt.”

            You understand thats like the definition of gatekeeping right?

            I don’t want a world where huge amounts of the stuff we see is empty slop, I like art,

            More gatekeeping. How is this any different to someone complaining about modern music being “empty slop” because they dont use real instruments? And just because you dont like something doesnt mean it should go away. Plenty of people dont like abstract art and think its not “real art” but those people are also gatekeeping assholes, just like you.

            and this stuff is a threat to the potential of so many artists.

            Again, if art is all about expressing yourself and human creativity, and AI art isnt “real art” and will never produce anything meaningful, then how is it a threat? You’re actively contradicting yourself.

            If Toby Fox decided to use AI to generate all of the imagery in that game, it would be nowhere near the art piece it is.

            And if he just made all his art abstract paint swirls and splatters, it also wouldnt be anywhere near the art piece it is. So that means abstract art isnt real art right?

            • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              “im not gatekeeping, but im deciding what counts as art and what doesnt.”

              You understand thats like the definition of gatekeeping right?

              I would also say that a tree growing freely in the forest isn’t art, am I gatekeeping plants from art?

              More gatekeeping. How is this any different to someone complaining about modern music being “empty slop” because they dont use real instruments?

              Because modern music is art, a lot of it isn’t amazing, but it’s art.

              There’s an idea, which is executed through a medium by a human or set of people, and the end result is art.

              If something isn’t made by a person, it is by definition not art, see my tree in the forest example from before.

              Again, if art is all about expressing yourself and human creativity, and AI art isnt “real art” and will never produce anything meaningful, then how is it a threat? You’re actively contradicting yourself.

              If the mud in my garden isn’t delicious chocolate as you claim then why can I still get botulism from it and fucking die?

              It’s a threat because:

              1. Capitalism will seek to use it for more efficient extraction of value, leading to popular culture being even worse on average.

              2. It’s just bad?

              And if he just made all his art abstract paint swirls and splatters, it also wouldnt be anywhere near the art piece it is. So that means abstract art isnt real art right?

              What? Yes, if the artist used a different art style for the visual parts of it, it would be a different piece of art. If it was made by a person it would still be art.

              In that point I was trying to get at two things:

              1. Even if you have basically no skills needed for gamedev, you can overcome it by effort or by collaboration.

              2. Another danger of AI, as using it would have been the easier option there, but in turn the end product wouldn’t be anywhere near the same quality.

              • papertowels@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                I would also say that a tree growing freely in the forest isn’t art, am I gatekeeping plants from art?

                Is bonsai an art? I’d say it is. In that case the difference between that and your example is humans providing artistic direction.

                Does the same not happen with generative models? In the typical use case, humans provide artistic direction.

                • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  It doesn’t happen with the output of a generative model by itself, if you edit it afterwards then it can be art because someone did put at least something into it.

                  Still though, the base in that case is completely meaningless and you’d have to change it massively for it to be anything worthwhile, just like a bonsai requires a lot of effort to be turned from a regular tree to art.

              • gmtom@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                I would also say that a tree growing freely in the forest isn’t art, am I gatekeeping plants from art?

                What?

                Because modern music is art, a lot of it isn’t amazing, but it’s art.

                Because you say so? What makes you the great arbiter of what is and isnt art? You are literally gatekeeping by the very definiton of the word.

                If the mud in my garden isn’t delicious chocolate

                What?

                Yes, if the artist used a different art style for the visual parts of it, it would be a different piece of art. If it was made by a person it would still be art.

                So peoeple that do things like put a hole in a paint can and let it swing back and forth over a canvas? Is that still humans making art? What about mechanical things spirographs? is that still humans making art? What about digital art the relies heavily on computer tools (including tools that often use AI)? What about photographers? Or what about someone that uses generated AI aspects in their digital art? Your definition is reactionary gatekeeping bullshit. And there is no logical reasoning behind it.

                Even if you have basically no skills needed for gamedev, you can overcome it by effort or by collaboration.

                Okay thats entirely besides the point.

                Another danger of AI, as using it would have been the easier option there, but in turn the end product wouldn’t be anywhere near the same quality.

                And the Mona Lisa would have been easier to make on a Wacom tablet, but wouldnt be anywhere near the same quality as the original. So Digital art is dangerous too right?

                You cannot make an argument against AI that cannot be logically applied to other art as well. So your whole argument is purely emotional reactions and arbitrary gatekeeping.

                • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Because you say so? What makes you the great arbiter of what is and isnt art? You are literally gatekeeping by the very definiton of the word.

                  I’m fairly sure I mentioned the definition I use for art before. Ai generated images can’t be art because they’re not made by a person, there’s no underlying thought or message, it’s just algorithmic slop.

                  Same thing goes for a tree growing freely in the woods, there’s no intent behind it, the tree just grows the best it can to fulfil it’s need for sunlight and nutrients, as such it is not art.

                  Both the tree and AI can create imagery that can be considered beautiful, but beauty != art.

                  Modern music however is created by people, even if the message behind it is that “I feel so clean like a money machine.”

                  Mud chocolate bit

                  The point is that even if AI generated images are trash, they can still do harm to culture.

                  So peoeple that do things like put a hole in a paint can and let it swing back and forth over a canvas? Is that still humans making art? What about mechanical things spirographs? is that still humans making art? What about digital art the relies heavily on computer tools (including tools that often use AI)? What about photographers? Or what about someone that uses generated AI aspects in their digital art? Your definition is reactionary gatekeeping bullshit. And there is no logical reasoning behind it.

                  That is all people doing things, yeah.

                  Okay thats entirely besides the point.

                  I’m just saying this regarding the dEmOcRaTiSinG aRt cringe, are has been democratic for as long as people could make coherent vocalisations, you people just don’t want to put in any effort into it.

                  And the Mona Lisa would have been easier to make on a Wacom tablet, but wouldnt be anywhere near the same quality as the original. So Digital art is dangerous too right?

                  It’s not about how easy it is, it’s about it being easy and artistically worthless. It doesn’t matter if the sprites were scanned sculptures or crayon stickmen, it was art.

                  You cannot make an argument against AI that cannot be logically applied to other art as well.

                  If you willingly misinterpret the point, yeah.

                  It’s not about it being easy, it’s that you cannot just take a bunch of art, and taking the fucking averages of it and hoping it to be anything but (at best) pretty images.

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t understand how you can miss that of course they are up in arms. The only thing anyone seems to want to use this tech for is to devalue their work.

      (Aside from MS who wants to be sure I can cram more productivity for the 1% into my workday.)

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I work in a creative industry. Our artists are already using Photoshops generative AI in their work. Which has only made their lives easier. But then again, they are all highly educated and not terminally online.

        • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          But then again, they are all highly educated and not terminally online.

          So you think the fact that you work with creatives who have accepted this state of affairs means that no other creatives have a valid complaint about their work being devalued, and that anyone who feels they have such a complaint is not thoroughly educated, and probably terminally online. Do I have your position about right?

          • gmtom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yes, I respect the opinions of well educated professionals over the opinion of uneducated randoms on the internet.

            Much in the same way I think because I know doctors that have “accepted the state of affairs” in regards to vaccines, that when I see some random person on the internet who disagrees, getting all the technical details objectively wrong, then I write them off as some uneducated nutjob. And I’d be willing to bet you do essentially the same, right?

            I would consider myself an “expert” on AI and robotics (thats what I did my masters and Ive been a founder of 2 different robotics/AI startups) so when I see people give their bad takes on AI and get the technical details completely wrong, I dismiss them as uneducated. And because of my work/education I know a lot of other people that are highly educated on AI, include people that are actual artists, none of them, literally not a single one shares these “AI bad, why no do laundry instead!!!” opinions with these randoms on the internet. And none of these people have ever made a logically consistent argument to me as to why they have that opinion. Its always bad faith or emotional arguments.

            If one of these people were to ever demonstrate they know how AI actually works and made an actual well thought out argument against AI to me, I would be more than happy to listen to them and respect their opinion. But I dont see that happening any time soon.

            • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I don’t think you can quote me as discussing any of the technical details. I think most creatives who I encounter are not reacting to or considering technical details. They are responding to impacts AI usage has had on them and their industry. One example that comes easily to mind because of all the appeals I saw on social media to stop flooding them with AI garbage is Clarkesworld.

              You are out her defending this technology when OP and nearly all complaints aren’t about the technology, they are about the shit way in which it’s being employed, which is to devalue their works, harm markets, and squeeze out more productivity for the 1% to profit from.

              I can almost feel how excited you were to swing your credentials around here while implying no one else is actually a creative, or that we’re all just making things up, but you didn’t reply to this at all, even though it’s 100% simply true:

              So I either have to but premade assets or hire artists to do the work for me.

              And by using AI you do neither of those things, and devalue the work of those who do make those things.

              You can have good reasons for doing so. It doesn’t change the outcome. Have the integrity to admit it, at least.

              • gmtom@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                I think most creatives who I encounter are not reacting to or considering technical details.

                Thats where the entire “AI just takes parts from other peoples art work and sticks them together” argument comes from.

                And this image that got spread around A LOT. That gets the very fundamental details entirely wrong.

                One example that comes easily to mind because of all the appeals I saw on social media to stop flooding them with AI garbage is Clarkesworld.

                Okay? You could also manually spam a magazine with bad shirt stories, but thats not a valid argument against human generated stories is it?

                which is to devalue their works, harm markets,

                And Im stating that the technology makes making art easier, so If you adapt to it instead of getting emotional and stubbornly refusing to accept change, then you’re not going to lose out like you will if you dont accept new technology. Just like a traditional artist complaining that digital art has devalued them. Its simply made art easier, so you need to adapt.

                can almost feel how excited you were to swing your credentials around here

                Yep thats why i mentioned them in my very first comment…

                while implying no one else is actually a creative,

                Except I didnt. I said people that give uneducated opinions are uneducated.

                we’re all just making things up

                Because you are?

                but you didn’t reply to this at all, even though it’s 100% simply true:

                And by using AI you do neither of those things, and devalue the work of those who do make those things.

                Because it misses the point. The point IS that AI means I dont HAVE to do either of those things. I cant afford to pay an artist for custom art for my passion project. Before AI I would have had to just give up on the project because I dont have the money. But now I can generate it myself in photoshop and I can actually work on my passion project and enjoy myself doing it.

                Do you buy all your clothes from people that hand weave the fabrics? Because if you dont then you’re devaluing the work of the people that do that.

                Do you buy all your food directly from people who hand farm in their gardens? Because if you dont then you’re devaluing the work of those farmers.

                Do you make art with real brushes made in traditional ways by artisans? Or do you use digital brushes and devalue the work of those traditional artisans?

                Technology makes things easier, it always has and always will. You can either cry and complain about it, refuse to change and be mad at people that do things the easier new way and become obsolete, or you can adapt. Simple as that.

                • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Because it misses the point.

                  So much for integrity.

                  I don’t think you’ve understood the points anyone has tried to make, and your rebuttal examples are false equivalences.

                  Good Day.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ah because a lack of understanding of tech is the only possible reason one might have for criticising the way society allocates priorities.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        congrats you missed the entire point of my comment.

        What op is doing is like saying “Why do we keep making Netflix shows instead of curing cancer???” Thats not a good criticism of societies priorities, because those things are not mutually exclusive and making a show on netflix is much easier than curing cancer.

        Its the same here. Its not like we are choosing to automate art instead of laundry, automating art is just orders of magnitudes easier.

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Thats not a good criticism of societies priorities, because those things are not mutually exclusive and making a show on netflix is much easier than curing cancer.

          That’s a nice strawman, there. Why don’t you ask the direct question: Are advances in laundry and dish washing technology easier or harder than in image generation?

          You made no argument as to why automating art should actually be easier – all you provide is an assertion. Consider the billions sunk into buying shovels from nvidia, how much progress could’ve been made on the laundry front?

          Then, your whole line of inquiry is missing the point: It’s not so much about relative complexity of the tasks, but the fact that we do enjoy the one, but not the other. What does it say about a society when we focus on automating what we like to do at the expense of stuff that we don’t like to do?

          Or, differently put: How much advancement in AI do we need to make to have it ask us what a dabbling beginner artist can already ask us, and that is why the hell are we making this choice, and not the other? Art is the science of choice, give it some respect.

          What you’re doing there is not being smart, being all so enlightened rational MINT brained, what you’re doing is going to extreme lengths to ignore a simple question. Was that choice conscious?

          • papertowels@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Why don’t you ask the direct question: Are advances in laundry and dish washing technology easier or harder than in image generation?

            Image generation, being purely software, is far easier than automating physical tasks. There’s very little risk of danger, you can iterate much faster, and costs are lower.

            Consider the billions sunk into buying shovels from nvidia, how much progress could’ve been made on the laundry front?

            Automating laundry would’ve also required this, as the shovels are for general machine learning. In fact as far as I can tell, these gpus aren’t being bought for image generation, but large language models now.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              There’s very little risk of danger, you can iterate much faster, and costs are lower. Not really a clear analog, but Boston dynamics spot robot is like 75k, whereas most image generation models are downloadable for free.

              I was thinking more development costs. The product price of the robot I’m sure can be brought down significantly with sufficient automation.

              Automating laundry would’ve also required this, as the shovels are for general machine learning.

              Those LLM fucks are working towards AGI, I don’t think my washing machine needs to be sentient to do a good job. Or read reddit and conclude that it should add glue to the detergent.

              Engineering-wise improvements in laundry are way easier to deal with because the problem space is well-defined. Want your clothes to come out folded? Sure, not easy, but at least we know what behaviour we’re looking for and how to assess it.

              • papertowels@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                I was thinking more development costs.

                Like I said, not really a clear analog, however I’m hoping this shows the difference working in the real world makes when it comes to R&D costs. Idk how accurate this website is, but we’re talking about literal billions in R&D. Versus most stable diffusion models are trained up by a grad student or something - and subsequently released for free potentially as a reflection of the r&d price.

                I don’t think my washing machine needs to be sentient to do a good job.

                But you will need them to be able to recognize the type of clothing and orientation in a 3d space before manipulating it, and that’s where training models comes in.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Versus most stable diffusion models are trained up by a grad student or something

                  Most SD models are fine-tunes of stuff StabilityAI produces. Training those things from scratch is neither cheap nor easy, PonyXL is the one coming closest as there’s more of its own weights in there than of the SDXL base model but that wasn’t a single person enterprise. One lead dev yes but they had a community behind them.

                  If it was that easy people wouldn’t be griping about StabilityAI removing any and all NSFW content from their dataset so the community has to work for months and months to make a model erm “usable”.

          • gmtom@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            That’s a nice strawman, there

            Thats not what a strawman is.

            Why don’t you ask the direct question: Are advances in laundry and dish washing technology easier or harder than in image generation?

            Harder, obviously.

            You made no argument as to why automating art should actually be easier

            Apologies, I assumed people had common sense, but you’ve made it clear I was incorrect. My bad

            Consider the billions sunk into buying shovels from nvidia,

            Shovels?

            Then, your whole line of inquiry is missing the point: It’s not so much about relative complexity of the tasks, but the fact that we do enjoy the one, but not the other. What does it say about a society when we focus on automating what we like to do at the expense of stuff that we don’t like to do?

            Its actually like talking to a brick wall.

            I need you to understand that people dont sit in meetings and say “should we casually create robots that can do all our daily chores and free the working class from the chains of capitalist oppression, or do we automate furry porn???” We are not automating art at the expense of laundry.

            1. We a re doing both

            2. and I hate that you’re making me repeat this over and over because you have tumblr levels of reading comprehension. Its orders of magnitude easier to white a computer program than it is to build a fucking robot.

            What you’re doing there is not being smart, being all so enlightened rational MINT brained

            The absolute. fucking. Irony.

            simple question. Was that choice conscious?

            Youre still missing the ENTIRE FUCKING POINT of my comment. There isnt a choice, this isnt 1 or the other. For the love of god learn to read.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago
              Consider the billions sunk into buying shovels from nvidia,
              

              Shovels?

              “When there’s a gold rush, be the one who sells shovels”.

              “should we casually create robots that can do all our daily chores and free the working class from the chains of capitalist oppression, or do we automate furry porn???”

              Why not? Why aren’t we doing it? Why aren’t you doing it, why are you reinforcing us not doing it by putting other perspectives down as “braindead artist takes”?

              There isnt a choice, this isnt 1 or the other.

              Maybe not a binary choice, but there’s definitely a priority. People question that priority. Is that question, in your perspective, valid? Would it hurt humanity if we replaced, say, 0.1% of pointless meetings with meetings discussing robots vs. furry porn?

              Be bold, ask that question.

              • gmtom@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Why not? Why aren’t we doing it? Why aren’t you doing

                For the exact same reason YOU nor anyone else is curing cancer, or sending people to Mars, or letting us live forever or creating usable fusion power plants.

                And I have told you those reasons MULTIPLE FUCKING TIMES. But your head is so far up your own arse it’s like you are physically incapable of reading anything that goes against your dog shit, braindead world view.

                So I will reiterate for the umpteenth time:

                1. We are doing

                2. It’s really fucking difficult so it takes time.

                Do you understand this time or do you need me to draw you a fucking picture?

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I need you to understand that people dont sit in meetings and say “should we casually create robots that can do all our daily chores and free the working class from the chains of capitalist oppression, or do we automate furry porn???”

                  You’re saying we aren’t doing it.

                  We are doing

                  Now you’re saying we are doing it.

                  But I think we should set that aside for a second. The actual question I am interested in getting an answer for from you is “should we be doing it”.

  • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Robotics researchers agree but they can’t get it to work yet. Simple tasks as cleaning tables, loading dishwasher and folding laundry have been tried for the last two decades with very limited success. The ones that do succeed are usually tele-operated for a demo.

    • simple@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not to mention if it does happen and it does make it to consumers these robots will be insanely expensive to make and maintain. People going “why doesn’t AI just work on physical labor?!” can’t seem to understand that software is a million times easier and cheaper to make

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don’t mind AI being able to do all 4, and humans can use the AI tools to create their own art, or do it without them if they want. But I definitely agree I want manul labour done by robots.

    Side note: has this woman never heard of a dishwasher? Minimal manual labour required.

    • Kaity@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      There are plenty of places without a dishwasher, I just moved from an apartment that didn’t have one. Hand washing was a very time consuming chore and we only barely escaped the poverty trap so buying one was out of the question, and if we did, it would be a small portable one because it was just an apartment. I’m not adding value for free to the landlord charging double what would have been barely reasonable in a non-enshittified society.

    • Dave@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      My dishwasher has remote start functionality if I download the app. But what I really need is remote-load functionality.

      • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Honest question: what is the upside of having a remote start functionality on a dishwasher? You have to load the dishwasher before starting, so you need to be at home anyway and it’s not like you have to schedule your dishwasher to finish right when you’re coming home from work or something. I can’t see the benefit.

        • Dave@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          The dishwasher came with the house, I didn’t choose it, but I searched it up at the time. Apparently some people will put in the detergent in the morning, and everyone loads their dishes in all day, then you can start it from bed at night so it’s clean in the morning.

          Apparently another benefit of WiFi connectivity is that you can get a notification when it’s done.

          Personally I’ve never connected it as the benefits don’t seem to outweigh the spying.

        • ThyTTY@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          The benefit is that the dishwasher can be labeled as “smart”, be more expensive and can track your activity through the app. Oh, and don’t forget about more points of failure and security issues!

          Sorry for being bitter, I’m in the process of a kitchen upgrade and find I’m frustrated by the options I have

        • cerement@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          are you using your own knowledge to guide the tool or are you just letting the tool appropriate someone else’s work?

        • Tippon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Do you know of any decent guides for getting started please? I’ve got a load of cassettes from the 90s that I want to fix, and trying to do it manually is slooooowww 😩

          • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            What exactly are you trying to do with them? I’d say let me know what you’re currently doing and what you’re trying to achieve. Very happy to help! I actually just finished a pretty huge digitizing project with VHS, DV, and 8mm cassette so this is all very fresh currently lol

            • Tippon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Sorry, I missed your reply.

              I’m mostly just trying to clean them up. They’re old tapes, so they’ve started to degrade. They have that wavy sort of sound, as if they’re playing back at an uneven speed. They’ve also got random noise in places, so instead of being able to record a sample of noise and remove it from the whole track, I’ve got to do it manually for sections of the recording.

              Apart from the wavy sound it’s all straightforward enough, just time consuming

              • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Yeah those are pretty complicated issues. Is it all spoken word? I have a few ideas that might be useful and, more importantly, sweeping/not manual lol. And don’t worry about the delay in the reply!

                If you’re comfortable, you could send me a 60s sample that you feel is somewhat representative and I can try one or two things and then show you what I did. There are some pretty amazing automated, straightforward tools that can do a lot in certain situations. Depending on the specifics we may be able to pull off some serious improvements for you.

                • Tippon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Thank you :)

                  These are all music. My father was given a lot of demo tapes when he ran a pub, and I’ve ended up with them. I thought it would be a nice project to digitise and restore them, then send a copy to the bands. I won’t be able to send a clip for the next day or two though.

            • Tippon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Sorry, I missed your reply.

              I’m mostly just trying to clean them up. They’re old tapes, so they’ve started to degrade. They have that wavy sort of sound, as if they’re playing back at an uneven speed. They’ve also got random noise in places, so instead of being able to record a sample of noise and remove it from the whole track, I’ve got to do it manually for sections of the recording.

              Apart from the wavy sound it’s all straightforward enough, just time consuming

      • PunnyName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I would like an AI tool that lets me easily make the art in my mind, skin to how a dishwasher washes dishes. Like, the labor reduction would be a huge boon.

          • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Like 60% of creating art is the process though.

            Goes more so for the more physical art forms like traditional painting, sculpting and so on where you have a physical medium that will shape your working process. But even in digital art I feel like you should go through and iterate and let the process shape how the end piece comes out.

            Having a program just like translate your brain impulse into a picture feels kinda hollow… it’s definitely better than image generators but still, there’s a part missing.

            • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              like 60%

              If you’re going to throw out random/arbitary bars like this we can’t have a serious discussion.

              I didn’t build my cameras. Or write the software. Or construct the lenses. I didn’t do 60% of the work that goes into my shooting video.

              See how arbitrary this all is?

    • regrub@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Calling AI generated pictures “art” is insulting to most artists. I agree though, all this hype is driven by short-sighted capitalism

      • JimSamtanko@lemm.eeM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        You seriously think people wouldn’t do for free what others require pay for under any other socio-economic society?

        Oh, right…. Capitalism is to be blamed for…. Everthing ever.

        Don’t get me wrong. Capitalism sucks, but let’s not dilute the water.

      • PunnyName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s good enough that people won’t hire artists to do their art. Are you a corporate suit who needs mock ups of a certain idea or product? Have an unpaid intern spend 5 hours prompting Sora AI to produce hundreds of, and sort down to 5, images that you can use on your post-golf lunch meeting tomorrow afternoon

  • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I mean I certainly agreed with the sentiment, but this is largely describing dishwashers, washing machines, and dryers, which were invented some time ago.

    Part of the reason these take time is that a lot of folks are resource conscious (as am I). So we want the dishwasher to be efficiently loaded, the clothes to be dried on a clothesline if possible, the white/colors to be separated (increasea the longevity of the clothes), etc. Sacrificing all of these things makes these chores really very quii, if you can afford to have them all in your home.

    And in fact, the cost of these things is relatively low — in my high COL area, it’s not that people can’t afford these things, it’s that they can’t afford a place big enough to accommodate them. Which is its own issue altogether…

    • PunnyName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Please don’t fix the quii typo. Instead, could you define it, and then submit it to Urban Dictionary? Because that’s an awesome word!

  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    That’s a problem with unchecked capitalism, not AI. Remember how George Jetson was able to have a house in the sky, a suitcase spaceship, full home automation, a robot maid, and supported his whole family by pushing a button? Consider how many people lived and worked on the ground beneath that cloud cover to make that possible.

  • crawancon@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    haha as If Ai was ever going to stop at laborious tasks.

    it was beating chess champions long before writing and art came into the picture…

    • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      That feeling of dread when you blunder a piece against stockfish and it doesn’t even take it but instead pushes a random pawn. That’s when you know you’re really in the shit.

      • crawancon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        regardless of the backend mechanism of the particular Ai, it was still always going to encroach on multiple disciplines.

        maybe robots can do dishes but Ai is more than a robot.

      • weker01@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        This is just wrong. Yes they do.

        Take stockfish for example. It’s probably the most well known engine. It uses specialized neural networks to evaluate board positions.

      • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Machine learning is only one AI technique. AI research has been going on since the 1950’s. They’ve gone through many different approaches with widely varying results. Symbolic and logic based AI, expert systems, minimax, Monte Carlo tree search, and many different machine learning approaches.

        • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          They’re clearly talking about machine learning in the pic, though. And in my experience, so is practically everyone else when it comes to AI discourse these days.

          • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Clearly? What’s so clear about that? I doubt the person quoted in the story even knows what machine learning is, let alone the differences between LLMs, CNNs, and older techniques such as expert systems (the AI in video games) or fuzzy logic (the AI in fancy rice cookers).

  • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I get the sentiment, but generative AI isn’t stopping anyone from making art. And you’re going to have to dedicate the same amount of time to chores with or without it. :/

  • Tinks@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Honestly I just wish companies would stop trying to shove half baked AI into everything. I work for an IT consulting company and every vendor in the tech sector is shoving AI down our throats right now, and most of it, including Google’s, just isn’t ready yet. And they want our clients to pay subscriptions for the privilege of beta testing it. It’s quite exhausting.

  • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I cannot overstate how much I want a robot butler to take my dirty dishes and fill and start my dishwasher for me. Or just wash the dishes “by hand”. It’s not that filling the dishwasher takes a long time, but it’s just boring work.