this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2025
619 points (95.3% liked)
Fuck AI
2518 readers
910 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nah. Go fuck yourself. You don't get to declare all digital artists "non-artists." Your issue, and mine, is with AI garbage. Not with original creators using non-ai tools to create art.
I think they're pointing out some hypocrisy.
For example, at what percentage of it being AI generated does it no longer be considered art? Backgrounds only? 30%? 5?
What about something created that could only be realistically done with AI, like stylized QR codes?
Having an issue with these things but not 3D rendered art, Photoshop, etc is the issue. I guess it's a bit pointless on this community, but having such a black and white view on the tech is really dumb.
And for the record, I am opposed to some AI - primarily commercial AI trained on data that wasn't paid - I'm just not opposed to open source things that are run locally, especially if for non-commercial purposes.
You can create a stylized QR code without AI. You could create a QR code by hand if you wanted to.
That is not feasible, especially when it covers to the type of QR codes shown in the example, because humans can't read QR codes, which means we can't warp the data points in the QR just barely enough so that a reader could still pick it up because it's within the error threshold - we don't know what the threshold is. We could do something black and white with exact accuracy, like by using graph paper, but that wouldn't be the same as there's no warping of the code points, so what a human could do would at best always be a worse illusion than what the AI could do, because the AI can know what limit it can warp the QR too while keeping it readable, while we can't.
That's why I used this as an example - this is something only a machine can feasibly do with any practicality, because we don't have machine vision so as to calculate where error thresholds would lie if trying to reproduce by hand. I suppose if you're really, really good with math, you might be able to replicate something like what I posted, such as the red panda - but at that point, is using math to draw art? If so, then AI would be considered art too. If not, then 3D rendering isn't art either.