You can be friendly to it, but that doesn’t mean you need to like everything. People are friendly to traditional art, doesn’t mean they have to like every single piece of traditional art. People can be into food, but they don’t need to like every single cuisine.
Surely you wouldn’t take the position every single thing on here needs to be GenAI? So in the middle is where we find ourselves.
So be discerning, you owe yourself that at least.
Back to the topic:
This piece is just a bit rubbish and kinda unmemorable. The one I linked did a better job of conveying the same message in a more memorable way IMO, and it seems that opinion is shared by other users of your instance.
There’s s small handful of folks who dogmatically hate-post about anything genAI. But the vast majority couldn’t care less. This is in fact a relatively popular post for this community at 106 downvotes and 519 upvotes, and that’s including all the anti-genAI downvote bots, and all the neoliberals. So remind me why ~1/6 of users should dictate to everyone else what the community allows?
And tbh we are never gonna become anti anti-genAI instance. Fuck copyrights and the horse they rode in on (capitalism). You anti-genAI trolls are becoming annoying enough we might need to add a rule about it.
Given my comment got half the upvotes of the post, I could make the argument that half of the people in here agree with me saying it was a bit rubbish.
Like be honest, do you genuinely think the original post is actually more memorable and effective* at conveying the message than the Murdoch one? If you do, that’s fine I guess, art is subjective, but you don’t get to insist everyone else has to love it.
*This is a lefty memes community remember, that’s the important thing
Given my comment got half the upvotes of the post, I could make the argument that half of the people in here agree with me saying it was a bit rubbish.
Not how math works i’m afraid. At most that would be 25%, and a bunch of them probably just like the other meme.
This whole debate is off topic for the community. If you want to open a META post about whether we should allow GenAI in this community then just do that, instead of trolling in the comments.
Yeah if it’s actually got artistic merit or is actually interesting in some way sure, life isn’t black & white, so I won’t be either. Cards on the table, I’ve got some issues with how some of the big models have been trained and deployed, but no real issue with the technology itself.
The AI art will be at most as good as the effort going into it, and honestly it’s pretty clear that 90% of the stuff you see posted around at the moment barely had 30 mins spent on the idea.
I can guarantee I’m not gonna like much of any traditional art where it’s clearly low effort and derivative either. The best art does something new and interesting
You can be friendly to it, but that doesn’t mean you need to like everything. People are friendly to traditional art, doesn’t mean they have to like every single piece of traditional art. People can be into food, but they don’t need to like every single cuisine.
Surely you wouldn’t take the position every single thing on here needs to be GenAI? So in the middle is where we find ourselves.
So be discerning, you owe yourself that at least.
Back to the topic:
This piece is just a bit rubbish and kinda unmemorable. The one I linked did a better job of conveying the same message in a more memorable way IMO, and it seems that opinion is shared by other users of your instance.
There’s s small handful of folks who dogmatically hate-post about anything genAI. But the vast majority couldn’t care less. This is in fact a relatively popular post for this community at 106 downvotes and 519 upvotes, and that’s including all the anti-genAI downvote bots, and all the neoliberals. So remind me why ~1/6 of users should dictate to everyone else what the community allows?
And tbh we are never gonna become anti anti-genAI instance. Fuck copyrights and the horse they rode in on (capitalism). You anti-genAI trolls are becoming annoying enough we might need to add a rule about it.
Given my comment got half the upvotes of the post, I could make the argument that half of the people in here agree with me saying it was a bit rubbish.
Like be honest, do you genuinely think the original post is actually more memorable and effective* at conveying the message than the Murdoch one? If you do, that’s fine I guess, art is subjective, but you don’t get to insist everyone else has to love it.
*This is a lefty memes community remember, that’s the important thing
Not how math works i’m afraid. At most that would be 25%, and a bunch of them probably just like the other meme.
We already had the Murdoch one posted before. Its not a zero sum game.
You should, if you’re going to remove comments you don’t like and break no rules.
This whole debate is off topic for the community. If you want to open a META post about whether we should allow GenAI in this community then just do that, instead of trolling in the comments.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
so you’re saying you’re friendly towards some AI art, right?
Yeah if it’s actually got artistic merit or is actually interesting in some way sure, life isn’t black & white, so I won’t be either. Cards on the table, I’ve got some issues with how some of the big models have been trained and deployed, but no real issue with the technology itself.
The AI art will be at most as good as the effort going into it, and honestly it’s pretty clear that 90% of the stuff you see posted around at the moment barely had 30 mins spent on the idea.
I can guarantee I’m not gonna like much of any traditional art where it’s clearly low effort and derivative either. The best art does something new and interesting
Ok fair enough. Just wanted to make sure you weren’t doing the whole separate rules for different viewpoints thing.
It’s a memes community not fine art ffs
I was asked a question about AI art so I answered 🤷♂️
Even tried to bring it back on topic
Removed by mod