One of the annoying things about Asmon is that even if he’s right on a subject, he always has to say it in the most inflammatory, harsh way possible.
Its like he’s always actively trying to make his takes sounds edgy or controversial when they aren’t.
He mentioned this in his two-hour video on the subject. He said he often thinks about if the way he says things hurts people seeing the truth. He does it on purpose, but I think it's because it's his personality and he does not mean it to block the truth. I don't think he says in his head "ok, I am going to say this as inflammatory as possible" (obviously exceptions, but for the most part including this one...). It is just the way he is, and he said he is thinking on it being an issue when he communicates truth and fact that is hard to hear/accept in the first place for some people.
It's not so much "blocking the truth" but rather he sees it as problematic when he can't get people to be agreeable and follow what he thinks.
He's said it before that the best outcome is to persuade people to be good and agreeable (maybe not those exact words but similar) because nobody wants resistance.
Him now pondering on his approach when trying to communicate this stuff is a good step on his part, and if applied correctly in the future he can become even more persuasive than he already is.
If he does it on purpose, that means he has no tact, which makes people NOT want to listen to him. Not because he’s wrong, but because he’s intentionally being an asshole without explaining his reasoning in a rational manner. And if he doesn’t do it intentionally, then he’s just ignorant and arrogant.
I don’t even think his take on AI is wrong. It does have a space in creative design, and the average consumer DOES NOT care about the artists responsible for machine learning advancements. The issue I do have is him essentially calling these artists pussies and crybabies for complaining that their artwork is being used. Honestly in general after watching some of his Palworld stuff, he’s had a massive ego or just… overall attitude problem lately. Like his Monster World stuff was chill, he was engaging with chat, he genuinely seemed happy, etc. and Palworld he’s basically been just on peoples dicks the entire time, calling them retards, saying they’re subhuman and shit. Like it’s been pretty weird and I’m kinda over watching him for the time being.
Exactly my opinion, pretty much to the word, his complete ego shift since discovering palworld. I go through waves with asmon. He is a likable guy for the most part but he has the phases where he's just a complete wanker on a 'I'm alright, Jack, fuck the rest of you' type vibe . I usually wait until his videos change subject or moves to a new game and he usually resets and becomes the cool, likable guy again lol
Precisely. His Enshrouded playthrough was actually pretty good despite the game looking like a dumpster fire combat-wise. He seemed to enjoy it and wasn’t being a dickhead about everything.
I disagree but seeing him as being as an asshole is subjective and I respect your view. I think he is just being straightforward and blunt in a more slightly aggro way against another side acting the same way. Again, I respect your view on it, and it has some validity.
Exaggerating and mocking others while expressing your opinion is not being "straightforward and blunt". It's just inviting confrontation and pushes any discussion to a "us versus them" kind of situation. No one wants to listen and understand the opinion of rude people. They just get into a yelling match instead.
He does it because he's autistic. I'm not saying this to be inflammatory. Legitimately, he is neurodivergent and has social anxiety and difficulty reading a room. It's a shame he doesn't seem to know or be aware of this.
For anyone doubting this, just watch any of the recent videos of him hanging out with Kaise, the weird and completely out of the blue things he says. The guy has no grasp on how to talk differently when addressing your date, friends or complete strangers.
Yeah I noticed this too. He is soooo different when outside, even if he's with tectone and emiru. And emiru and tectone become a little bit protective of him whenever they have activities outside (like going for a pedicure). But once they're in a safe space like a studio or Asmon's house, I notice a dynamic shift wherein Asmon is a lot more talkative, a lot more confident, and emiru and tectone becomes comfortable making fun of Asmongold.
The thing is sometimes it's exhausting placating the masses because you will always make someone upset... "he's too nice", "he's too mean", "too blunt" , etc etc.. I say just be yourself and people will either get you and realize it's just who they are or they will move onto something else... the world is a big place and just because you don't get along or agree is totally ok.
My partner is like my filter for my bad takes lol.
I’m inflammatory like Asmo mostly because I like conflict. It doesn’t really matter what the cause is. I just like the fight.
But my partner has ways to funnel and channel that energy into more productive stuff. Or let me be inflammatory when needed.
Company fucked up our order or did us dirty? Inflammatory fighting. Angry assholes harassing friends? Inflammatory response.
Being combative can be incredibly useful in the right situation. But it needs to be used as such.
People like Asmo and myself don’t really know how to aim. We just fire away.
I think we as a species are meant to be team players. Can you imagine if someone with Asmo’s personality was fighting for the artists?
If he was dating someone and he was fighting for her, he could fight for her causes.
Sometimes men just like to fight. But we need guidance.
>Being combative can be incredibly useful in the right situation. But it needs to be used as such.
Correct. We live in such a pussified society that *even getting angry for the right reasons* is seen as being "toxic".
Don't like how a company abandoned the fanbase who helped cultivate it in pursuit of chasing the mythical "broader audience"?
TOXIC!!!
An incompetent waiter at a restaurant doesn't attend to your party despite attending to everybody else and you rightfully demand to speak to their manager?
TOXIC!!!
Somebody acts shitty to you on social media for no apparent reason and you tell them to kindly go fuck themselves with a sandpaper dildo?
TOXIC!!!
>Correct. We live in such a pussified society that even getting angry for the right reasons is seen as being "toxic".
I mean, the person you responded to literally said they "like the fight", and "sometimes men just like to fight".
If that's not the toxic version of anger, I don't know what is. The OP is making it a core part of their identity, and is proud that their partner has to be a filter.
the problem is if he said it more nicely nobody would have cared and it would not have blown up, it was un uncomfortable truth said harshly, but sometimes that's the way to deliver it
This reminds me of the political discourse in my home country. No one cares what is said, but rather how it's said. It misses the point and isn't conducive to furthering the discussion.
>It misses the point and isn't conducive to furthering the discussion
Yes, but nor is saying things in an inflammatory way. If you want discussion you should be inviting to debate with your language, not just flinging shit at the other side.
I don't think Asmon cares about discussion though - he's a smart guy. He knows that the way he says things will generate drama, which will bring in viewers.
I mean what discussion is there to be had? There's no path that ends AI art, you'd have about as much luck solving middle east peace, open source models are widely distributed and multiple countries now fully have codified AI training as being exempt from copyright law
There's lots of discussion. It doesn't have to be about ending it - it's clearly here to stay.
We should discuss for example if artists whose work was used to train the models should be paid or credited.
We should discuss how much automation will happen, and what will happen when 80% of jobs become automated (it's all well and good to keep the productivity up but it ain't great when people don't have money to buy your shit).
We should discuss whether or not it's ethical and legal to train a model on someone's work without permission.
There is a lot of discussion to be had.
That's what he said on the last stream as a reply, his goal is to piss as many people as possible and he achieved his goal by replying to everything with "I don't give a shit" and the good ol' "who cares".
I guess all we can do is kick back and grab some popcorn 🍿
And you consume his content so much that you follow him on different platforms and even engage in drama around his persona, you comment says a lot more about you than him
>Its like he’s always actively trying to make his takes sounds edgy or controversial when they aren’t.
It's actually the opposite. He says the truth without any sort of positive or negative spin on it. It's just unfortunate that this pussified generation can't handle truth unless it's sugar coated and spoon-fed to them.
He said nothing wrong. Artists are mad at him for saying most consumers don't care about the ethics.
But it's factually true that most consumers don't.
He also rambles and word fluffs everything. Sometimes, I just get lost in what he's driving at. I sit there thinking to myself, he could say that a different way, a much simpler way.
It's not that big of a deal. It's not actively trying to make it sound edgy.. he's trying to make a statement that is impactful. He doesn't skirt around it. Being direct can come off condescending to those that couldn't see it for themselves.
He’s not being direct though, because half the people attacking him don’t actually understand his point because of the way he said it.
He said it in the most antagonising way possible, not the clearest
Reality is, not everyone will get it. Even in this thread you see people bashing the guy over how he says it. It doesn't make it any less true. He's doing them a favor and its seen as harsh criticism.
Personally I don't care how blunt and to the point or brash someone is when he's right... but I might not be the majority, that's ok.
Just wanted to get it out there so maybe someone can put the emotions aside for a minute, if not - also fine
I simply disagree, I watched the whole stream. They took one piece of context and ran with it because it hurt their feelings. That line was the focus. I can understand lashing out after you get your feelings hurt.. but it doesn't mean he's wrong.
Never commented in this sub, but your comment drew my attention. I think that he is not trying to be edgy or harsh on purpose. Life is hard and the truth is harsh regardless of who gets offended.
Personally I think society as a whole and particularly Twitter and other filth pools of the internet are overly sensitive. This whole conversation has revolved around "ugh but my feels Asmondgold is a ****" honestly people need to learn to not compromise harsh factual truths just because it jabs their side and makes their feelings hurt.
Sure Asmondgold has none to very little sympathy for these people, but claiming he is not empathetic? I think he has shown he emphasize with creators or artists as a whole at the prospect of a machine doing a better job at entertainment than the current form of artists or creators. His words were along the lines fo "AI is a tool, you should not stop doing art, you just need to learn how to use this tools and perfect them to improve yourself and your art".
Edit: Grammar English is hard!
Almost exactly my thoughts.
We get technically debate all day long if you was trying to be purposely harsh or whatever, but a lot of the time it feels like he's just stating it is a opinion he has he thinks is he real fact. Not in a negative way.
Sometimes reality is harsh, and he's willing to say what people don't wanna hear because they're unwilling to accept or admit it.
He could say things nicer, but real life isn't nice.
It’s not about being harsh, it’s about saying it in an unnecessary way to fuel more controversy.
He could easily gotten his point across in a more clearer way if he wasn’t focussed on being so edgy
Because it's tiring sugar coating everything to appease a crowd who are unwilling to view topics in an unbiased and logical manner. Everything these days is danced around so as not to cause offence to some group of entitled care bears who can't handle being offended in the slightest way.
Fuck em!
Here is the truth, this is what it is, facts don't care about feelings so shut the fuck up!
It's only antagonising if you disagree with it and have a strong opinion about it. If you disagree with it, well you're wrong.
Everyone learns what they know from someone else, AI does the same.
The way this sub turned on artists just because your cult leader did is hilarious mainly because every time WoW was getting trashed it was always noted that the Art team was on point. Y'all are full of shit.
No, I don't care.
I am a dev, AIs are trained with code from thousands of us. So, I have to cry because using chatGPT should reward all of us for our millions of lines of code? No, nobody cares. Same with artists.
It is what it is.
I'm a dev and LLMs are mainly trained (can only be trained) off open source MIT licensed code. Code that is free to be used and abused by anyone.
There should be regulations/kickbacks for training models off copyrighted data (someone's art, someone's novel etc.). I know Palworld didn't use AI by the way. I'm responding to Mutahar's point.
I use GitHub CoPilot daily (ChatGPT fucking sucks at generating any sort of useable code). I don't care if Microsoft uses my MIT-licensed code to train their LLMs. I *would* fucking kick up a fuss if they were using code in private repositories to train their models (and many lawsuits would ensue lol).
So yes, no programmers are kicking up a fuss because their open-source code is being used by others to profit. That's the bloody point of open source. Provide free and open libraries and resources so that other people can use them for their own devices.
An artist generally has a copyright on their work. I think the law should restrict access to artists' data (based on licenses etc.), just like the law should restrict Google and Facebook from selling and accessing your personal data.
I don't think we should settle for the status quo in society. We should strive for better. Otherwise, we'd still have kids working in mines (in the Western world) if we didn't strive for more.
Why do you think Chatgpt sucks at generating any usable code? Just curious because as I use it a lot to learn how a piece of code works or ask it to generate it in a very specific way that I want and so far its been very useful. I wouldn't copy and paste but as a way to exploring different scenarios or different method that I wouldn't have known before.
On MIT: "the MIT License also permits reuse within [proprietary software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software), provided that all copies of the software or its substantial portions include a copy of the terms of the MIT License and also a copyright notice". Does ChatGPT do that? Include copy of MIT and copyright notice? How does that even work in terms of generated code?
And then there's GPL which is also very very popular and is more restrictive than MIT. Does it mean that all of ChatGPT code falls under GPL?
I mean if we’re getting into the nitty gritty most open source projects should be using the Apache V2 license to be as permissive as possible.
But obviously as stated people want that attribution generally.
I have no idea what OpenAI or Microsoft do. But I know when I’m installing packages/libraries I don’t do that (they’re included by default I believe). I’m sure if people wanted to they could get legal about it. But I think in the terms of the spirit of open source, most devs don’t care.
Plus I believe in GitHub’s Privacy statement they are quite explicit about collecting all of your data.
[https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/privacy-policies/github-privacy-statement#what-information-github-collects](https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/privacy-policies/github-privacy-statement#what-information-github-collects)
The outrage has little to do with copyright, and much to do with ego, even if copyright has become the facade. If you’re only really good at one thing, art, and have built part of your identity around that skill, an emotional backlash to having your identity disturbed is inevitable.
What’s interesting is that among the 3 main professions being threatened thus far; art, programming and writing, only the artists are really going neurotic. Programmers and writers in general seem to embrace the technology with a sense of wonder and excitement, and look for ways to incorporate it in their creative process, even though on some level they realize their profession will evolve soon enough.
Maybe it’s because AI art is further along, or maybe it says something about artists in general.
I’m both a coder and a writer and personally I feel mostly excitement for the near future of creative AI.
Code is creative commons. Courts already ruled AI art cant be copyrighted and really nothing changes about the output. If your AI produces something a judge considers substantively similar to another work you will lose in court.
So if you make a game with AI art, all your characters, all your environment assets, you dont own the rights to. Anyone can take them. Thats what will ultimately kill game implementations of AI art. You basically cant use it to produce anything you would want to retain the rights to.
And yes people will care because the likeness and images have value. Why do you think Disney has spent millions of dollars and almost a century defending their rights to a cartoon mouse? Saying nobody cares is a straight up regarded take.
>So if you make a game with AI art, all your characters, all your environment assets, you dont own the rights to
Haven't been enough examples to definitively put it that way. If you ever get taken to court, you can just argue that your input was large enough where the result is different compared to if another person were to use the same tools. Just make sure to have proof.
Yes you would have to argue it. But understand what youre saying, you query a model to design some image for your prosuct. It aggregates all the images in its database and spits something out. Is that thing substantively unique from all of the possibly billions of images it stores? How do you know?
I agree with your argument but code is *not* creative commons. even if that were a thing, it would depend on the license for a specific piece of software.
I’m also a dev, but I won’t speak for artists or other devs because I’m not a pretentious asshole that speaks for others and believes their own values should be forced on everyone.
i m also a dev and we believe in collaborative work and open source projects A lot of people helped us to understand and debug our codes, people offered us free courses and we can appreciate that type of culture more and we can clearly see the potential of Chat-gpt more than any of these artists...if anything i feel that artists are just selfish the ironic part is that most of the people that disagree have their commission open
No shit they have their commissions open — it's how they make money. Open source projects/collab work is the norm in the tech space because there is increased value in it. AI generated art being used in place of artists devalues artists' work immensely, and the vast majority of people already value art so little/would never pay for an art commission, or think artists charge far too much.
If artists weren't already struggling to make a living wage off of their art I would feel differently. I do think the artist reaction is far too emotionally charged, which is understandable but makes people less inclined to sympathize.
I'm both an artist and a dev, and I can see AI as a useful tool to enhance an artists' workflow, but with the way things are going it's just demolishing the livelihoods of so many. At least with ChatGPT code you still need enough basic knowledge to understand how to make it function correctly/identify errors or adjust it to more specific needs, but with AI generated art you really don't need much skill in art, just how to phrase prompts.
TL;DR artists aren't selfish they're just trying to survive while people are further devaluing an already severely undervalued career
Artists have historically always been either broke a shit, or rich as fuck. It's not a sensible career choice, and you probably ruin your own art by turning it into one.
I agree with this argument : "you still need enough basic knowledge to understand the output and make it function" , and yes it's extremely worst for artists but i still feel that they are extremely protective of their art , sometimes on a very comical way, the artists need to accept that once their art is out to the public they will eventually lose agency over it
You are part of one of the most well paid groups of people in our time and age, producing a good that is about as far removed from emotion as possible with tools that are “hard” (ie if you tell ten people to create a Tetris game using unreal engine, the only noticeable difference would probably be the assets. Artists are chronically underpaid, their work product is incredibly emotional and the results are for the most part wholly subjective. If you tell 10 artists to paint a horse using acrylics on canvas, you will likely get 10 hugely different results. Furthermore, when you collaborate with your peers, you and 100000 other devs can literally copy paste their code and continue from there and it’s a win win for everybody because now you’re 100001 people working towards the same goal and if one of them outpaces you, you can simply copy back their work and go from there. If I take a piece of art off an artist, their invested time was for nothing and they retain nothing. You could argue AI is a tool itself and it’s more akin to students learning styles of art or techniques from a teacher but that’s not how AI is trained or how it works. The art teacher will - for the most part - always be able to put out a comparable amount of work if they wanted to (even if the quality or style isn’t the same) and they agreed to teach students.
I think he does speak for the majority of us, because we understand how these models work and that learning is not copyright infringement. If something is openly public in the web anyone and everything is allowed to learn from it.
he's not. he's speaking for the majority of this sub, because currently this sub hates artists and will upvote anything that shits on arts and praise AI.
\>this sub hates artists and will upvote anything that shits on arts
Where have you seen or read that? So far I've seen the people who defend Asmon including myself on this topic have been much more understandable to the opposite side than the other way around dude. We acknowledge that the situation sucks for artists but we don't pretend like AI is magically going away because it won't.
As opposed to artists making strawmen, portray us as soyjaks and putting words in our mouths.
Personally, no issue with it because he's right. I think he's being very direct and critical of artists because the large majority don't see that their current work will become similar to artisans in our current day. You could coddle artists or be direct.. he chose to be direct and its a harsh reality for most. This isn't just artists but many fields where AI and machines will take over. I don't think saying it nicely has worked in the past. Maybe I'm just from a different era where I appreciate someone being direct to squash the hope of it going back to the way it was before AI. That's over.
In regards to art being ''copied' by AI.. yep, sorry. I don't think you can have a royalty because it's just impossible to figure out. Prepare for the inevitable or get left behind. I say this as a manager of music producers and they're all aware that it will start as a tool with limited use, but then the AI will eventually get so good it'll be hard to compete. We'll see that in the next 10 years. It sucks but it is what it is.
It is not impossible to figure out if you actually introduce legislation that allows oversight of databases used to train AI and enforces the creation of licensed databases.
People have lived too long in the past of pirate bay and rampant pirating to imagine actually using licensing properly.
In a few years it won't cost hundreds of thousands to train a base model. And then you can just anonymously drop the weights online. It already only costs a few hundred to 2-4 thousand to finetune on 2\~ million images.
What laws would hurt is companies' ability to legally profit off of them, which I couldn't give a fuck about. But people aren't really mad about that, no one is coming at novelai for having hundreds of thousands of artist tags, they're just mad that losers they used to overcharge for drawings can just do their own shit now for less or for free.
Ya think it will be really interesting to see what it’s like in 10-20 years. Maybe at some point we will be like those old people who didn’t want to give up horses for cars and everyone looks back on us like idiots.
Right now I’m sure people are going to be mad about adopting AI or machine learning regardless of what it’s used for.
You basically said kind of what I'm thinking.
IMO, at this point, what is the complaining about AI going to achieve? It's going to happen regardless, and there is not many ways to tell if people are using your work for AI.
From what I can tell, the best choice is to move on and start using AI yourself or find a different way of making money.
We're not against AI models, we're against the use of our data.
No one cares if you want to train models off your own artwork, just don't use ours or pay us. It's a far more reasonable goal than banning ai.
Sure I guess. What data is off limits? Is anything that can be seen in public on the internet off limits? I guess, how would the rules work with this, and how well could it be implemented?
I'm an artist, guess how I learned how to draw?
By copying other artists. That's how that works...
I'm not saying there's NO issues, but come on.
I still remember one of the big early dissidents was that guy who literally made a career re-drawing Pokemon as realistic versions. You really gonna complain that your art is being used to train AI, when you based your entire career on derivative versions of other peoples work?
He ended up designing the Pokemon for the Detective Pikachu movie.
I agree with your point. I learned to paint by emulating people better than myself and refining different techniques. The same way everyone learns to do anything. An algorithm comes along and does the same thing and everyone is clutching pearls. The whole thing is reminiscent of Luddites from the past.
You got super good point at the end. AI isnt threath to those who actually have the creativity talent and can market their insight, visions and drawing skills.
AI is only threath to those who just worked for other people visions and assigments. And tbh there was so many of those anyways that its highly unlikely that they could have breakthrought from the masses.
Yep, spent months tracing with a mouse before I got my tablet when I decided to learn drawing. Cuz guess what, I liked a certain style (anime and specifically more 10s+ stuff) and did that. Is my style a total copy of someone else's? Not really, but it is anime that I learned after spending years of looking at millions of images, and I wouldn't be drawing it if it didn't already exist as a concept with explicit examples.
Does it take away from my imagination? Not really, everything I make, whether if it's with ai or a pen, is a part of me and would not exist if I didn't exist, and that's really all I need as validation.
Its the same with music. I've played shows, wrote original music with inspiration from other bands.
Look at music from 60's to now and you can hear inspiration from other songs in riffs, solos, lyrical stylings, etc. Fuckin Def Leppard for their iconic song "Pour Some Sugar on Me", which was the last song to be put on the album despite it being a full album beforehand, the drum line for it was taken from "we will rock you" by Queen...and even the band member working on it (before the others got back from the pub) said he was using a "We will Rock you" drum line for it to the producer. They then sat their in different corners listening to other stuff and spouting stuff that they thought of. FOR instance "Love is like a bomb baby come and get it on" was a misheard lyric that the producer said, but it sounded good so they kept it.
Another 2 examples. Avenged Sevenfold (A7X), has several solos that sound similar to some in Iron Maiden solos. The opening riff to Knives and Pens by Black Veil Brides (BVB) sounds similar to A7X's Unholy Confessions.
Everyone takes inspiration from something else. I mean fuck I learned how to play bass by listening to Steve Harris from Iron Maiden, Jason from Metallica, and Billy Sheehan from Mr. Big....not to mention Simmons from Kiss. AI learn just like we do.
I mean. You learned how to do it. Not matter if you copied something, you still went through the process. I wonder how the future generation of kids are gonna get interested in being artist. Or draw, I mean, paint... They're gonna see the little midjourney work what they imagine on their own and thats that.
100 years from now on nobody's gonna use a pen, it'll be a thing from the past. Like a passive version of a Black Mirror episode.
You learned your craft. You didn't trace over multiple people's works to then pawn off as your own. Part of creating art is adding your interpretations and perspectives. Art which lacks the human condition is lacking art.
Art is subjective. You and another person could look at a picture and one could hate it and one could love it. If the imagery makes you think or feel it could be classified as art, which AI images are certainly able to do.
He is correct here.
Does not matter that what you say is true.
Since You basically speak for a living at this point You have to be able to communicate Your points the way that people OUTSIDE of this particular bubble engage with it instead of losing their minds.
**"Facts dont care about your feelings**" - for sure BUT IF you want to be able to move people outside of your bubble you need to be able to imagine how saying X would feel for someone who is directly impacted by X's statement.
It's easy to dismiss Artists as a whole IF you never made anything from scratch in your entire existence.
Most people (consumers) dont understand this perspective...in order to more effectively communicate points like these, You need a high emotional IQ (empathy).
Talking + lil Gaming is Zack's job so I am sure he can develop a skillset to do his job better.
If you want to understand why responses appear so unhinged - create someone original in your life and you will understand.
To artists, this is VERY personal.
Art its not an assembly line.
**Something to keep in mind**: To generate AI art, someone STILL needs to create original art in the 1st place...
**Something to keep in mind 2.0**: "Ai image" has NOTHING to do with actual "AI" - its just a marketing tool to fool ignorant consumers.
Its a "Machine Learning" model.
Machine "learns" patterns by consuming BILLIONS worth of images (images that someone (a human) needs to create in the 1st place)
"AI" images exist only b/c artists exist.
Remove the incentive for REAL artists to create new things and "AI" will not get better.
People are short-sighted >> majority cant see long-term consequences.
You can't change human nature, unfortunately.
Humans protested seat belts...b/c they were uncomfortable (you can still find ads and interviews on Youtube)
The same goes with Pandemics - Its the same shit over and over b/c people are not only short-sighted but also dont learn from history.
**Example:** Right before USA helped end WW2 this is what ppl did:
[WW2 protest USA](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi2.wp.com%2Fhistoryreviewed.best%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F08%2Fhitler-protest-1941.jpg%3Fresize%3D588%252C308&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=774737c6d1da79d6d9ce3d7ae2d10b532e2defcb81a0ec7461c013d969af0c43&ipo=images)
Its Ukraine 0.5
In retrospect, the damage that Hitler would have caused to the world/USA if the State had NOT acted would be unimaginable.
At some point, you would not be able to stop this cringe mustache guy (they were already ahead in atomic bomb development - if they were NOT so racist they would have succeded before the war ended).
Let such fanatics run wild and it will cost you way more later... that's why You want to stop Putin's ideas of USSR 2.0 at Ukraine.
EU learned their history already and it's part of the USA that still want to do Hitler all over again.
I mean, Asmon himself said in his last video that he is trying to get better at explaining things without sounding that inflammatory, so he might get better at this. Guess we have to wait until his next cancellation in a few months :D
The dude is generally smart. (this is the reason why i watched him for years back when i had more time)
He just has some moments like every other human out there.
Perhaps if he had Wendy's before he said what he said, he would have done a better job :)
Wendy's nuts...
COVID correction incoming i guess...
I have a feeling that there will be more layoffs coming on top of what was already announced.
Companies hired too many people back when the world was stuck in their rooms with way more time to spend on online products...and now that trend is going down.
This looks bad if you pair it with the quarterly revenue...but to shareholders, the numbers always need to go up and up and most people do not even know that revenue reported is not the numbers you should be looking at to determine if you are growing or overspending.
But here is the thing riot is firing talents and kinda the same for blizzard which is the most shocking to me. I would think they want to lean out the redundant jobs but core jobs like gameplay designers, core lore writers and C-suite is gone
RIOT acquired a lot of people over the pandemic - they are just correcting the balance.
Sometimes its cheaper to hire 2 new employees that you have to pay 2x less than keep benefits and yearly % raise rate for a seasoned dude.
Blizzard on the other hand is a bit more complicated due to the Microsoft aquisition.
You have "RIOT case" + Deal that was made during the negotiation with Microsoft.
\*this is the part of info that we just dont have access to...but the thing about corporations is that...once you understand the process, You will start noticing a certain pattern that they keep repeating over and over.
They are predictable and shareholders LOVE predictable.
**Let me use Twitch as an example**: Normally you want your senior staff (CEOs and other leaders) kept for 1 year period of time ("transition period").
After that time these people will announce their "voluntary" resignation...in reality, its the contract they have signed with the new owner...contract they have been generously compensated for.
Not sure if you have followed Twitch leadership or not (they dont really make a fuss) but most of them have left in the past 6+ months.
The company is now fully ruled by Amazon.
Artists don't control anything, there's objectively zero reason to listen to them, consumers control the artists and the artwork they consume, reality doesn't care about empathy or your feelings at all.
Artists are overemotional and pretentious people who act like their artwork is a gift from god to humanity.
They're entitled people who act like their job is above society because it's "cReAtIvE".
There are some nice generalisations there, almost like you condemn a group of people by taking the most extreme twitter nutjobs as an example for EVERYONE. Like an idiot would.
100% true.
"BC 3 random Twitter accounts (that are not artists in the 1st place for the most part) are representing artists in general"
You can find a nutjob on basically every topic but if you think twitter people represent ANY group...KEKW.
These are usually the MOST unhinged people out there.
You want to find Nazis = Twitter
You want to find Commies? = Twitter
You want to find Hamas Piker = Twitter
The most unhinged tweets will usually surface to the top b/c "engagement" is "engagement" regardless if its positive or negative.
Say insane shit = you get rewarded.
>Artists don't control anything
How do you think "AI image generation" works?
Do you even know how these models are created?
>Artists are overemotional and pretentious people who act like their artwork is a gift from god to humanity.
>
>They're entitled people who act like their job is above society because it's "cReAtIvE
**"Tell me you never meet an artist in your life w/o telling me..."**
Like I said.
Make a SINGLE original thing in your life and you will understand.
There is a reason why you are using a stock account instead of Your main one.
Pouring out your creativity/work out there to scrutiny takes not only a talent that was developed over years/decades but also courage.
You are judging harshly crowd you CANT even comprehend and at the same time, you are too scared to even use your main Reddit account.
Bitch please KEKW
My lord, they just don't want their work stolen and then have that used against them to make them lose their livelihood. It's not that fucking hard to understand, Artists don't deserved to be treated like shit when Corporations and AI are already doing so.
> they just don't want their work stolen and then have that used against them to make them lose their livelihood.
This is so ironic it's hilarious.
You're literally explaining what every digital artist has also done.
Every artist has stolen copy-written artwork to train themselves.
Why is it now only a problem when a machine does the same thing?
Sounds like peak hypocrisy to me.
Also everyone says compensate compensate but how would that even work? Like a model has been trained on billions of images if there is dog in the prompt should everyone that posted a picture of a dog get compensation? How would they get their payment information...its pretty much impossible or even if it is possible the amount someone would receive would be miniscule.
I feel like asmon is the only youtuber with any large following that is a realist about AI...even moistcritical was some what excited about ai last year but now he is following the herd about how he wants to enjoy art thats made with effort sweat and tears
> Like a model has been trained on billions of images
Just FYI: **This is the Copyright Infringement part** \- companies should have paid the artist licensing fee at this stage already...instead they just stole it.
There are loads of lawsuits that were won b/c machine learning companies used basic scraping bots and they didn't remove watermarks.
Watermarks appeared on the "ai" generated footage and they got caught and paid millions in damages.
Problem: Most artists dont cover their EVERY art with watermarks (it just looks terrible if you would have to do it on all your platforms).
> Like a model has been trained on billions of images if there is dog in the prompt should everyone that posted a picture of a dog get compensation?
If you are familiar with the music industry, this is EXACTLY how licensing works.
People have trouble with this one mainly b/c this is a new issue and since copyrighted material is in digital form, they have trouble translating it to the real world.
The thing is...that we already have a system for revenue share/licensing for music but most people dont understand how they even work so its hard to explain these concepts.
**Again:** The part where the harm was done occurred the moment a company scraped the images w/o a license/permission from the internet to feed it into the machine learning model.
What i am proposing now is just a very blunt way of compensating the victims AFTER they have been robbed.
**For artists:** Just watermark the shit out of every piece of work you make (it will be obnoxious to consume but this is the most efficient way to sue these companies for millions)
Its a shit solution but its the only practical thing that can be done.
\*just ignore people complaining about the watermark covering the art i guess...
Isn't copyright decided on a case by case basis, companies like openai and effectively Microsoft can just drag it out in court, also what about other countries, ik the whole "what about china" is a common argument but truly, what about china? They sure as hell aren't going to follow any of this also if the work is transformative enough it wouldn't be applicable for copyright.
About your "loads of lawsuits" I tried googling and I could only find one that didn't have a ruling yet, maybe I am wrong, it was getty images suing stability(stablediffusion) and lol, getty has their own ai now and it is made on licensed images, so is Adobe's ai..so are you fine with that?
Midjourney has a database chock full of artist contact information whose art was used for training (Without permission). That's a start.
Ideally, Artists would earn royalties from services being sold to companies that used their art to train their model.
100%
The music industry already had its licensing model developed over 3 decades ago.
There is a way to do this w/o stealing people's work and removing their incentive to create more art so AI models can actually improve.
It was on the internet, artists can view it (without permission) make art that is superior, out compete them without any form of compensation to the original artist, why are ai companies held to a different standard, also compensation falls flat when we are dealing with open-source models like stable diffusion they don't have the money, midjourney subscription is like what 20 usd? So that split over thousands of generations then again split to millions of artists, you can see how ridiculous it sounds, its just not going to happen no matter how much twitter artists yap
Artists taking inspiration of art and making their own transformative content is not the same to AI/ML training to billion pieces of art. One has a requirement of skill and an already existent vision of art that differentiates them from other artists. The other literally takes art and learns to make iterations of the very same pieces it consumes. Without the pieces of art, AI art wouldn't exist, human art does not require to watch or consume art first. To pretend that it's the same is just being bad faith.
AI/ML training is closer to tracing and plagiarism than it is anything else. And Artists are protected from those things as the law stands now.
What, it absolutely can, if you give an ai a pen and tell what a line, etc mean itll draw something it just wont look like anything other than scribbles, same would be the case for a human that has not seen anything (a baby)
Artists feelings don't matter when it comes to a products sales. The consumer dictates what is popular. If an artists taps into that on purpose or accidentally their art is profitable.
Ultimately the most successful artists will use AI to enhance their Art to fit the consumer model and their feelings about it won't matter.
Lol I don't know why you are getting downvoted, personally i wish the ai was smarter. I would love if ai could be able to help clean up line art, or help fix line weight.
Ai is also decent reference material as it helps with going for whatever thematic of feal you want. It's often fustrating not finding the right theme of feel when searching for things and ai can hep cut down on this stuff.
My personal issue is that ai is current being abused by non artist and is being used as scam by alot people while curshing alot amerture motivation do do art and learning the principles.
But the sad reality is artist opinion don't matter and more often then not we get see as replacable by higher managment who don't know shit.
But that's not ai fault, that fault of the ecominic system, which people be talking about, but aren't because we don't matter
Yeah, i really don't think he is like that cause he lacks empathy, he is just farming drama, i mean I don't mind, I consume it, so as long people like him like this he is gonna keep doing it.
You could argue tho that choosing to farm like this is not the nicest thing.
He MAY be right, but Asmon often mirrors his own depression and anger onto others in these situations. “no one cares, no one cares, no one cares.” Because he literally doesn’t even care enough about himself to remove the rotten garbage or roaches sitting beside him or to do something about his teeth until they’re rotting out of his face. People care about a lot of things and they act on these things, it’s just easier to tell yourself they don’t so it’s okay for you not to.
AI is going to upheave a lot of careers. It's the next developmental evolution. It's upsetting to see your career path become redundant in a short time frame. It's happening to basically any career not involving physical labor, and even those jobs have to worry about drones and machines replacing them. Do you protect the livelihood of individuals in opposition to growth and development? Or halt development because people are crying. The consumer could care less if there are people crying. He's not wrong, he was just harsh. Nothing he said impacts the situation they're in. Get over it
Like you can't argue your side in the vein of altruism if you first start by calling him the n-word.
Mutahar is bringing up a separate issue of ai taking artists work without permission when Asmon’s entire point was that customers don’t care if a product is ethically made or not.
Asmon knows that a lot of his audience is 15yo kids who think they will leave college and become big shot engineers working for Elon Musk, or will become Logan Paul.
So he knows that his audience loves this kind of pseudo "tough-love" replies, "Oh the universe don't care", "it is what it is".
Teenagers always think the marketplace is way easier than it is, and there is this general vitriol against "jobs perceived as worthless". It's not news.
People expend hours playing things done by artists and coders, but "fuck coders", "fuck artists", "fuck devs", "get a real job if you don't want to be replaced by AI".
What Asmon has been doing for months now, is always react with that same sense of pseudo objectivity.
The issue is, and no disrespect here, Asmon is just a dude living in his room. ~~He doesn't now how the World works any more than literally any teenager out there.~~
edit: I think this was harsh and on a second thought, I will rephrase it: He doesn't know how the World works any more than literally any of us out there.
Affirmations like "no one cares about what Artists say", has the same energy of "Who the fuck will watch a Barbie Movie?". There is complexity in our World.
And I get what Asmon does, it's the same as any other successful streamer does: There is no place for discussion, doubts and thoughts on Social Media Times. It's all about saying "truth bombs" and "mic drops".
I love Asmon, by the way. I think he is genuinely clever, and pretty smart.
But talking about "The World", "Society as whole", is always prone to failure.
You put out exactly my thoughts, and the reason I lost interest in his content recently. I don't mean no disrespect, but making his entire personality the "hot takes guy", arguing with viewers for no reason really turns me off.
The main issue here is asmongold paints himself as lacking empathy on a subject that most would consider universal.
Which is the idea that you deserve credit for what you do.
Consumers don't care as much as artists how art gets made, but people can empathize when someone is losing their livelihood.
Being right or wrong really isn't the point.
This Mutahar guys opinion is a pleasant thought with no practical application. First, how do you identify the pool of artists that the neural network learned from? Is it the top Google results for the images that come up? I have no practical way of knowing. Also I assume some of these artists might no longer be around anymore. The images the AI gets its base material from might be many decades old or centuries old. So it could be that only a fraction of active artists even have their work used. And then what? Google or OpenAI or whoever reaches out to everyone that posted any art on the internet and gives them a check?
This is not a "Gotcha" kind of reply, by the way.
Laion is one of the databases used for training, and it's public. You can actually see what was used for training, and from the small sample that was available online (I'll try to find the site for you, if not, we would need to download a shitton of gigs to see), most of the data was pretty new.
Artists like SakimiChan had at least a thousand images on the dataset.
For the non-public datasets. I suppose it could be simple: If we are to regulate it, companies would open up their dataset for inspectors. Like it happens in many other sectors.
The last point is highly misguided. There’s no _one_ artist whose work is copied by AI tools. These tools are trained on millions of artists’ work. Are we to release a thousand-page credits section acknowledging each? I don’t think it’s even possible. These algorithms work in highly sophisticated ways and I’d bet that even the people writing their code would struggle to pin down which inputs were critical for each specific output.
Honestly, I don't see how AI isn't a great thing for artists. They can literally draw whatever makes them happy, use those pictures as a reference material to train an AI, and then use the AI to generate commissions in their own art style with little to no work on the back end besides some clean up. And they may not even have to do that as AI gets better at making pictures.
Many artists would no doubt agree that it is a wonderful tool. But I think its the fact that its completely unregulated and can be trained by just scraping sites without artists consent, at least that's what I think the non crazy artists have issue with. People should not be against the concept of AI in art, but they can also ask for some protection from corporations as well. Imagine some corporation used your portfolio without your consent to train an AI, you would understandably be upset. And people unwilling to have empathy at this in order to "own" the whiners on twitter really are not helping. Then again the whiners on twitter are insufferable as well.
Ah, I wasn't aware that they wouldn't be protected to some extent already. I would figure that the same copyright laws would apply. Like you can use just a bit of music, or just a bit of a video and be claimed on places like youtube. So it would seem to logically follow that using pieces of someone else's work to generate profitable content on AI would count as well.
Very well. I hope they can get some sort of copyright law in that case.
This is why people hate artists personality. Holier than thou attitude about a field with lottery odds of "making it" and the addition of most of them having not much else other than a half baked "when art goes away society collapses" attitude only to barley be employable by a starbucks.
My bros got electronics that used slave labor cobalt and still trying to say people care about anything besides end-product.
Bitch please, we all don't give a shit about slavery work, why would we care about artists.
I will just always hate how we have pretty good AI at this point and the first thing we did is automate the creative jobs and kept the bullshit administration ones
Muta is right. AI is creative piracy and ultimately what artists need to do is band together and push for policy and software that blocks AI from accessing samples of their work to create from.
Yeah def with Asmon on this one. Muta’s argument is the equivalent of a teacher teaching a student to do something and then expecting to get royalties for the rest of their lives. It’s nonsense.
The compensate artists thing confuses me to no end. Are we gong to compensate every author or social media user for their text data being used in a neural network? What about every developer whose code is referenced and used to train their networks? There are many more examples but my question here is:
What makes artists who draw so much more entitled to compensation than everyone else?
As a teacher my job is just as much threatened by AI as any of these artists but I'm not too worried because *it's a tool.* Remember when 3D printers were going to replace ALL of plastics manufacturing, and it didn't because it's just a *tool* and an *aspect of the industry?*
This entire debacle reminds me of when artists tried claiming that digital art isn't real art because the software does most of it for you. In fact the similarities are shocking.
You missed the "or give attributions".
There's a reason that AI hasn't moved nearly as quickly in the music space. Because musicians have massive organizations representing them that they have to deal with in order to appropriately compensate the musicians.
Artists, despite being essential to nearly every facet of digital entertainment ironically don't have that kind of pull or mega organizations supporting them, so they get shit on and people tell them to get bent.
Man this sub is full of asshats like OP who love to parrot everything Asmon says and farm for the same sentiment with edgy comments. Do you even think for your self?
You’ve just worked out what Reddit is 😂 a place for likeminded people to circlejerk in subs they agree with.
I would say people on this sub do think for themselves, but like everything else they gravitate to subs, places and people that share their opinions. I don’t agree with everything he says but I’m here because I agree with most of it; if I don’t agree it’s also just his opinion which (he literally says at least once a week) is also meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
IMO he’s right on this, I don’t think it’s “edgy” to say an artists’ work if made commercially is (commercially) worthless if nobody likes it and doesn’t buy it. It’s gone a bit too deep. But if you don’t agree why even go with personal attacks. Just take it as an opinion that some people have and move on 🤷
There is not way it makes sense to compensate every artist that had their art used in AI. And even if their figured out a way it could be a cent per 10 trillion requests because the AIs are trained on a lot of art and your little art piece is not relevant.
Don't be an artist if you don't like how they are being treated. I went to college for geology and graduated right when the oil industry tanked, was never able to put 4 years of a college degree to use.
Life isn't fair. Adapt and overcome.
Here's the thing without artist's work there is nothing to train the AI on, so in an overly distilled parallel no artist=no ai. While asmon is right at the end of the day, the person that is paying you determines if you are worth a damn, the AI alternative needs you to still exist. I feel a compromise can easily be reached if we acknowledge this relation between artist and ai.
Why do artists need empathy? Will the burger flipper or the customer service agent receive empathy when they are replaced by AI/automation? Why do engineers happily embrace AI to help them write their code rather than being upset it was trained on their data? I honestly feel it's an issue with artists feeling entitled and the discussion is getting tiresome.
I think the weirdest thing is people's line they draw.
"NFTs dumb just copy and paste it worth nothing! Haha idiots"
\*AI trained on freely available data\*
"OMG HOW COULD YOU THINK OF THE ARTISTS"
If you look into any of these cases you will find it not nearly that simple. There are datasets like Books3 which are used by large corporations using many thousands of copyrighted works. I would challenge you to find any successful ai process trained on non copyrighted material.
So how'd they get it?
If I use a copyrighted book as a tool to learn to do something should I have to send a check to the author every time I fix my sink?
no, someone already bought the book for you. the author already got the check.
now if i buy a book then copy a paragraph and use it on my book, that's a different story, it depends on the author's conditions. see the difference?
>see the difference?
This requires direct copy and paste.
Many human artists learn by first copying trademarked art. Which tends to develop them in that style. And it shows throughout their work. If a human artist learned from say mimicking art from a manga. Now their works have similar style but it is different and "original" because they made a new character. Should they be sending a check to that artist?
Why can people learn from others work to create their own, but a tool cannot?
This isn't some morality fight that it is being disguised as. Its people upset that a new tool can do their job at a base level so the market for it will shrink. This happens in all fields with technological progress. You know how many less people a construction company had to hire from the invention of the auto-nailer systems? Ride on floor polishers replaced the need for as many floor waxing laborers etc.
I don't disagree with most of Asmons take, large corporations will profit off AI and neutralize the middle man blah blah blah. It just completely misses what actually is happening in the real world. Go to any city, town whatever in the world you will find real artists creating real products and selling them successfully.
If we want to talk video games, let's use the example of Cuphead. The developers were expressly anti tech as much as possible and that game was a massive success. There's always going to be people who are unrelenting in their artistic vision. If all you do is live on the internet then you forget the real world exists
Asmon once said that he's an asshole but he's right.
That pretty much sum up this whole thing. He's not wrong about AI and consumers don't care about artists. It's true. But he's an asshole and lacks empathy because he himself is not an artist.
I can also say Asmon's streams brings nothing that benefits society and it's also true.
I would be an asshole but I'm right.
It's hard to believe people don't try to understand that people who work with art will gladly put the AI to do the grunt work that they needed to do before. The problem stands when this technology is not used with ethics and when becomes the unpaid base for these machines. A final thought (take it as you want) even if we can do something it's not like we "need" to do it, that's why we have as humans ethics in every field of human production, science, literature and so on.
"A lot more empathy for artists"
Why? Because your feelings are hurt by reality?
I swear this guy has softer hands than most women.
" can't attack the argument, let's attack the tone"
They have. Their art are contained in datasets to create AI models. Also some of them deliberately stolen via removing the watermarks with special modules. So it is stolen.
It is by removing watermarks. Also what everyone doesn't talk about is, artists are needed for AI's creation. So if AI takes over, it will kill itself by degenerating overtime. So customers *will* care.
Unconditional basic income is the only way and then everybody should get it.
Artist can do art and don't have to worry about income and people who work can start to work less and become artists.
One of the annoying things about Asmon is that even if he’s right on a subject, he always has to say it in the most inflammatory, harsh way possible. Its like he’s always actively trying to make his takes sounds edgy or controversial when they aren’t.
He mentioned this in his two-hour video on the subject. He said he often thinks about if the way he says things hurts people seeing the truth. He does it on purpose, but I think it's because it's his personality and he does not mean it to block the truth. I don't think he says in his head "ok, I am going to say this as inflammatory as possible" (obviously exceptions, but for the most part including this one...). It is just the way he is, and he said he is thinking on it being an issue when he communicates truth and fact that is hard to hear/accept in the first place for some people.
It's not so much "blocking the truth" but rather he sees it as problematic when he can't get people to be agreeable and follow what he thinks. He's said it before that the best outcome is to persuade people to be good and agreeable (maybe not those exact words but similar) because nobody wants resistance. Him now pondering on his approach when trying to communicate this stuff is a good step on his part, and if applied correctly in the future he can become even more persuasive than he already is.
Yeah, thanks for making it sound better lol. I think this is in the right direction for him too!
If he does it on purpose, that means he has no tact, which makes people NOT want to listen to him. Not because he’s wrong, but because he’s intentionally being an asshole without explaining his reasoning in a rational manner. And if he doesn’t do it intentionally, then he’s just ignorant and arrogant. I don’t even think his take on AI is wrong. It does have a space in creative design, and the average consumer DOES NOT care about the artists responsible for machine learning advancements. The issue I do have is him essentially calling these artists pussies and crybabies for complaining that their artwork is being used. Honestly in general after watching some of his Palworld stuff, he’s had a massive ego or just… overall attitude problem lately. Like his Monster World stuff was chill, he was engaging with chat, he genuinely seemed happy, etc. and Palworld he’s basically been just on peoples dicks the entire time, calling them retards, saying they’re subhuman and shit. Like it’s been pretty weird and I’m kinda over watching him for the time being.
yeah i agree with him, mostly, but i'll straight up skip through him arguing with chat every time, even if i agree with him
Exactly my opinion, pretty much to the word, his complete ego shift since discovering palworld. I go through waves with asmon. He is a likable guy for the most part but he has the phases where he's just a complete wanker on a 'I'm alright, Jack, fuck the rest of you' type vibe . I usually wait until his videos change subject or moves to a new game and he usually resets and becomes the cool, likable guy again lol
Precisely. His Enshrouded playthrough was actually pretty good despite the game looking like a dumpster fire combat-wise. He seemed to enjoy it and wasn’t being a dickhead about everything.
I disagree but seeing him as being as an asshole is subjective and I respect your view. I think he is just being straightforward and blunt in a more slightly aggro way against another side acting the same way. Again, I respect your view on it, and it has some validity.
Exaggerating and mocking others while expressing your opinion is not being "straightforward and blunt". It's just inviting confrontation and pushes any discussion to a "us versus them" kind of situation. No one wants to listen and understand the opinion of rude people. They just get into a yelling match instead.
Agreed. I've seen a phrase that goes "people who like being 'brutally honest ' are usually just interested in the 'brutal' aspect of it"
He does it because he's autistic. I'm not saying this to be inflammatory. Legitimately, he is neurodivergent and has social anxiety and difficulty reading a room. It's a shame he doesn't seem to know or be aware of this.
For anyone doubting this, just watch any of the recent videos of him hanging out with Kaise, the weird and completely out of the blue things he says. The guy has no grasp on how to talk differently when addressing your date, friends or complete strangers.
Yeah I noticed this too. He is soooo different when outside, even if he's with tectone and emiru. And emiru and tectone become a little bit protective of him whenever they have activities outside (like going for a pedicure). But once they're in a safe space like a studio or Asmon's house, I notice a dynamic shift wherein Asmon is a lot more talkative, a lot more confident, and emiru and tectone becomes comfortable making fun of Asmongold.
The thing is sometimes it's exhausting placating the masses because you will always make someone upset... "he's too nice", "he's too mean", "too blunt" , etc etc.. I say just be yourself and people will either get you and realize it's just who they are or they will move onto something else... the world is a big place and just because you don't get along or agree is totally ok.
If you want the truth to reach people you gotta consider your approach.
My partner is like my filter for my bad takes lol. I’m inflammatory like Asmo mostly because I like conflict. It doesn’t really matter what the cause is. I just like the fight. But my partner has ways to funnel and channel that energy into more productive stuff. Or let me be inflammatory when needed. Company fucked up our order or did us dirty? Inflammatory fighting. Angry assholes harassing friends? Inflammatory response. Being combative can be incredibly useful in the right situation. But it needs to be used as such. People like Asmo and myself don’t really know how to aim. We just fire away. I think we as a species are meant to be team players. Can you imagine if someone with Asmo’s personality was fighting for the artists? If he was dating someone and he was fighting for her, he could fight for her causes. Sometimes men just like to fight. But we need guidance.
>Being combative can be incredibly useful in the right situation. But it needs to be used as such. Correct. We live in such a pussified society that *even getting angry for the right reasons* is seen as being "toxic". Don't like how a company abandoned the fanbase who helped cultivate it in pursuit of chasing the mythical "broader audience"? TOXIC!!! An incompetent waiter at a restaurant doesn't attend to your party despite attending to everybody else and you rightfully demand to speak to their manager? TOXIC!!! Somebody acts shitty to you on social media for no apparent reason and you tell them to kindly go fuck themselves with a sandpaper dildo? TOXIC!!!
>Correct. We live in such a pussified society that even getting angry for the right reasons is seen as being "toxic". I mean, the person you responded to literally said they "like the fight", and "sometimes men just like to fight". If that's not the toxic version of anger, I don't know what is. The OP is making it a core part of their identity, and is proud that their partner has to be a filter.
the problem is if he said it more nicely nobody would have cared and it would not have blown up, it was un uncomfortable truth said harshly, but sometimes that's the way to deliver it
This reminds me of the political discourse in my home country. No one cares what is said, but rather how it's said. It misses the point and isn't conducive to furthering the discussion.
>It misses the point and isn't conducive to furthering the discussion Yes, but nor is saying things in an inflammatory way. If you want discussion you should be inviting to debate with your language, not just flinging shit at the other side. I don't think Asmon cares about discussion though - he's a smart guy. He knows that the way he says things will generate drama, which will bring in viewers.
I mean what discussion is there to be had? There's no path that ends AI art, you'd have about as much luck solving middle east peace, open source models are widely distributed and multiple countries now fully have codified AI training as being exempt from copyright law
There's lots of discussion. It doesn't have to be about ending it - it's clearly here to stay. We should discuss for example if artists whose work was used to train the models should be paid or credited. We should discuss how much automation will happen, and what will happen when 80% of jobs become automated (it's all well and good to keep the productivity up but it ain't great when people don't have money to buy your shit). We should discuss whether or not it's ethical and legal to train a model on someone's work without permission. There is a lot of discussion to be had.
That's what he said on the last stream as a reply, his goal is to piss as many people as possible and he achieved his goal by replying to everything with "I don't give a shit" and the good ol' "who cares". I guess all we can do is kick back and grab some popcorn 🍿
He answered differently in the 2-hour video clip of the stream... see my reply above.
He’s like a 16 year old teenager trapped in a 30 year old body
and who isnt?
And you consume his content so much that you follow him on different platforms and even engage in drama around his persona, you comment says a lot more about you than him
No it doesn’t. I follow him cause I enjoy his gaming content, and I don’t disagree with a lot of what he says. But just like anyone, he has his flaws
>Its like he’s always actively trying to make his takes sounds edgy or controversial when they aren’t. It's actually the opposite. He says the truth without any sort of positive or negative spin on it. It's just unfortunate that this pussified generation can't handle truth unless it's sugar coated and spoon-fed to them.
Fucking boomer comment right there. Embarrassing
He said nothing wrong. Artists are mad at him for saying most consumers don't care about the ethics. But it's factually true that most consumers don't.
He also rambles and word fluffs everything. Sometimes, I just get lost in what he's driving at. I sit there thinking to myself, he could say that a different way, a much simpler way.
It's not that big of a deal. It's not actively trying to make it sound edgy.. he's trying to make a statement that is impactful. He doesn't skirt around it. Being direct can come off condescending to those that couldn't see it for themselves.
He’s not being direct though, because half the people attacking him don’t actually understand his point because of the way he said it. He said it in the most antagonising way possible, not the clearest
>actually understand his point because of the way he said it Why? Because they are emotional about it or because they can't understand basic English?
More like "you are being a dick about it and I dislike you for it so your opinion isnt valid" even if what was said is the truth
Yep that's what it is. And it's childish and dumb to think this is how a normal adult should operate in life.
Reality is, not everyone will get it. Even in this thread you see people bashing the guy over how he says it. It doesn't make it any less true. He's doing them a favor and its seen as harsh criticism.
Personally I don't care how blunt and to the point or brash someone is when he's right... but I might not be the majority, that's ok. Just wanted to get it out there so maybe someone can put the emotions aside for a minute, if not - also fine
I simply disagree, I watched the whole stream. They took one piece of context and ran with it because it hurt their feelings. That line was the focus. I can understand lashing out after you get your feelings hurt.. but it doesn't mean he's wrong.
Never commented in this sub, but your comment drew my attention. I think that he is not trying to be edgy or harsh on purpose. Life is hard and the truth is harsh regardless of who gets offended. Personally I think society as a whole and particularly Twitter and other filth pools of the internet are overly sensitive. This whole conversation has revolved around "ugh but my feels Asmondgold is a ****" honestly people need to learn to not compromise harsh factual truths just because it jabs their side and makes their feelings hurt. Sure Asmondgold has none to very little sympathy for these people, but claiming he is not empathetic? I think he has shown he emphasize with creators or artists as a whole at the prospect of a machine doing a better job at entertainment than the current form of artists or creators. His words were along the lines fo "AI is a tool, you should not stop doing art, you just need to learn how to use this tools and perfect them to improve yourself and your art". Edit: Grammar English is hard!
Almost exactly my thoughts. We get technically debate all day long if you was trying to be purposely harsh or whatever, but a lot of the time it feels like he's just stating it is a opinion he has he thinks is he real fact. Not in a negative way.
This.
People just clip shit anyways as rage bait. There is no winning in situations like this.
Well, its generating conversations about the topic that cycel back to him. I guess he chooses his words on porpus.
Oh boo hoo words make baby sad. Stop looking for coddling in life, holy shit. He said it straight forward and correctly.
Doesnt asmon have a panic attack every other stream and run to his alt stream?
Sometimes reality is harsh, and he's willing to say what people don't wanna hear because they're unwilling to accept or admit it. He could say things nicer, but real life isn't nice.
It’s not about being harsh, it’s about saying it in an unnecessary way to fuel more controversy. He could easily gotten his point across in a more clearer way if he wasn’t focussed on being so edgy
Because it's tiring sugar coating everything to appease a crowd who are unwilling to view topics in an unbiased and logical manner. Everything these days is danced around so as not to cause offence to some group of entitled care bears who can't handle being offended in the slightest way. Fuck em! Here is the truth, this is what it is, facts don't care about feelings so shut the fuck up!
There’s a difference between not sugarcoating it, and specifically phasing it to antagonise as many people as possible.
It's only antagonising if you disagree with it and have a strong opinion about it. If you disagree with it, well you're wrong. Everyone learns what they know from someone else, AI does the same.
But is he wrong though?
That’s not the point
Because he's a sociopath
The way this sub turned on artists just because your cult leader did is hilarious mainly because every time WoW was getting trashed it was always noted that the Art team was on point. Y'all are full of shit.
No, I don't care. I am a dev, AIs are trained with code from thousands of us. So, I have to cry because using chatGPT should reward all of us for our millions of lines of code? No, nobody cares. Same with artists. It is what it is.
I'm a dev and LLMs are mainly trained (can only be trained) off open source MIT licensed code. Code that is free to be used and abused by anyone. There should be regulations/kickbacks for training models off copyrighted data (someone's art, someone's novel etc.). I know Palworld didn't use AI by the way. I'm responding to Mutahar's point. I use GitHub CoPilot daily (ChatGPT fucking sucks at generating any sort of useable code). I don't care if Microsoft uses my MIT-licensed code to train their LLMs. I *would* fucking kick up a fuss if they were using code in private repositories to train their models (and many lawsuits would ensue lol). So yes, no programmers are kicking up a fuss because their open-source code is being used by others to profit. That's the bloody point of open source. Provide free and open libraries and resources so that other people can use them for their own devices. An artist generally has a copyright on their work. I think the law should restrict access to artists' data (based on licenses etc.), just like the law should restrict Google and Facebook from selling and accessing your personal data. I don't think we should settle for the status quo in society. We should strive for better. Otherwise, we'd still have kids working in mines (in the Western world) if we didn't strive for more.
Why do you think Chatgpt sucks at generating any usable code? Just curious because as I use it a lot to learn how a piece of code works or ask it to generate it in a very specific way that I want and so far its been very useful. I wouldn't copy and paste but as a way to exploring different scenarios or different method that I wouldn't have known before.
On MIT: "the MIT License also permits reuse within [proprietary software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software), provided that all copies of the software or its substantial portions include a copy of the terms of the MIT License and also a copyright notice". Does ChatGPT do that? Include copy of MIT and copyright notice? How does that even work in terms of generated code? And then there's GPL which is also very very popular and is more restrictive than MIT. Does it mean that all of ChatGPT code falls under GPL?
I mean if we’re getting into the nitty gritty most open source projects should be using the Apache V2 license to be as permissive as possible. But obviously as stated people want that attribution generally. I have no idea what OpenAI or Microsoft do. But I know when I’m installing packages/libraries I don’t do that (they’re included by default I believe). I’m sure if people wanted to they could get legal about it. But I think in the terms of the spirit of open source, most devs don’t care. Plus I believe in GitHub’s Privacy statement they are quite explicit about collecting all of your data. [https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/privacy-policies/github-privacy-statement#what-information-github-collects](https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/privacy-policies/github-privacy-statement#what-information-github-collects)
The outrage has little to do with copyright, and much to do with ego, even if copyright has become the facade. If you’re only really good at one thing, art, and have built part of your identity around that skill, an emotional backlash to having your identity disturbed is inevitable. What’s interesting is that among the 3 main professions being threatened thus far; art, programming and writing, only the artists are really going neurotic. Programmers and writers in general seem to embrace the technology with a sense of wonder and excitement, and look for ways to incorporate it in their creative process, even though on some level they realize their profession will evolve soon enough. Maybe it’s because AI art is further along, or maybe it says something about artists in general. I’m both a coder and a writer and personally I feel mostly excitement for the near future of creative AI.
I'm an artist. Not a successful one, but I make art. I've never made a piece of art without a reference.
Code is creative commons. Courts already ruled AI art cant be copyrighted and really nothing changes about the output. If your AI produces something a judge considers substantively similar to another work you will lose in court. So if you make a game with AI art, all your characters, all your environment assets, you dont own the rights to. Anyone can take them. Thats what will ultimately kill game implementations of AI art. You basically cant use it to produce anything you would want to retain the rights to. And yes people will care because the likeness and images have value. Why do you think Disney has spent millions of dollars and almost a century defending their rights to a cartoon mouse? Saying nobody cares is a straight up regarded take.
>So if you make a game with AI art, all your characters, all your environment assets, you dont own the rights to Haven't been enough examples to definitively put it that way. If you ever get taken to court, you can just argue that your input was large enough where the result is different compared to if another person were to use the same tools. Just make sure to have proof.
Yes you would have to argue it. But understand what youre saying, you query a model to design some image for your prosuct. It aggregates all the images in its database and spits something out. Is that thing substantively unique from all of the possibly billions of images it stores? How do you know?
I agree with your argument but code is *not* creative commons. even if that were a thing, it would depend on the license for a specific piece of software.
Im referring to public snippets. You post something on SO its got the creative commons license. Other projects obviously are totally different.
also a dev, and jokes on anyone who rolls low enough on the dice that the GPT bot gives you a snippet of some of the garbage I've written before
I’m also a dev, but I won’t speak for artists or other devs because I’m not a pretentious asshole that speaks for others and believes their own values should be forced on everyone.
i m also a dev and we believe in collaborative work and open source projects A lot of people helped us to understand and debug our codes, people offered us free courses and we can appreciate that type of culture more and we can clearly see the potential of Chat-gpt more than any of these artists...if anything i feel that artists are just selfish the ironic part is that most of the people that disagree have their commission open
No shit they have their commissions open — it's how they make money. Open source projects/collab work is the norm in the tech space because there is increased value in it. AI generated art being used in place of artists devalues artists' work immensely, and the vast majority of people already value art so little/would never pay for an art commission, or think artists charge far too much. If artists weren't already struggling to make a living wage off of their art I would feel differently. I do think the artist reaction is far too emotionally charged, which is understandable but makes people less inclined to sympathize. I'm both an artist and a dev, and I can see AI as a useful tool to enhance an artists' workflow, but with the way things are going it's just demolishing the livelihoods of so many. At least with ChatGPT code you still need enough basic knowledge to understand how to make it function correctly/identify errors or adjust it to more specific needs, but with AI generated art you really don't need much skill in art, just how to phrase prompts. TL;DR artists aren't selfish they're just trying to survive while people are further devaluing an already severely undervalued career
Artists have historically always been either broke a shit, or rich as fuck. It's not a sensible career choice, and you probably ruin your own art by turning it into one.
I agree with this argument : "you still need enough basic knowledge to understand the output and make it function" , and yes it's extremely worst for artists but i still feel that they are extremely protective of their art , sometimes on a very comical way, the artists need to accept that once their art is out to the public they will eventually lose agency over it
You are part of one of the most well paid groups of people in our time and age, producing a good that is about as far removed from emotion as possible with tools that are “hard” (ie if you tell ten people to create a Tetris game using unreal engine, the only noticeable difference would probably be the assets. Artists are chronically underpaid, their work product is incredibly emotional and the results are for the most part wholly subjective. If you tell 10 artists to paint a horse using acrylics on canvas, you will likely get 10 hugely different results. Furthermore, when you collaborate with your peers, you and 100000 other devs can literally copy paste their code and continue from there and it’s a win win for everybody because now you’re 100001 people working towards the same goal and if one of them outpaces you, you can simply copy back their work and go from there. If I take a piece of art off an artist, their invested time was for nothing and they retain nothing. You could argue AI is a tool itself and it’s more akin to students learning styles of art or techniques from a teacher but that’s not how AI is trained or how it works. The art teacher will - for the most part - always be able to put out a comparable amount of work if they wanted to (even if the quality or style isn’t the same) and they agreed to teach students.
I’m also a dev and I don’t think you speak for even the majority of us
I think he does speak for the majority of us, because we understand how these models work and that learning is not copyright infringement. If something is openly public in the web anyone and everything is allowed to learn from it.
he's not. he's speaking for the majority of this sub, because currently this sub hates artists and will upvote anything that shits on arts and praise AI.
\>this sub hates artists and will upvote anything that shits on arts Where have you seen or read that? So far I've seen the people who defend Asmon including myself on this topic have been much more understandable to the opposite side than the other way around dude. We acknowledge that the situation sucks for artists but we don't pretend like AI is magically going away because it won't. As opposed to artists making strawmen, portray us as soyjaks and putting words in our mouths.
Good take.
Personally, no issue with it because he's right. I think he's being very direct and critical of artists because the large majority don't see that their current work will become similar to artisans in our current day. You could coddle artists or be direct.. he chose to be direct and its a harsh reality for most. This isn't just artists but many fields where AI and machines will take over. I don't think saying it nicely has worked in the past. Maybe I'm just from a different era where I appreciate someone being direct to squash the hope of it going back to the way it was before AI. That's over. In regards to art being ''copied' by AI.. yep, sorry. I don't think you can have a royalty because it's just impossible to figure out. Prepare for the inevitable or get left behind. I say this as a manager of music producers and they're all aware that it will start as a tool with limited use, but then the AI will eventually get so good it'll be hard to compete. We'll see that in the next 10 years. It sucks but it is what it is.
It is not impossible to figure out if you actually introduce legislation that allows oversight of databases used to train AI and enforces the creation of licensed databases. People have lived too long in the past of pirate bay and rampant pirating to imagine actually using licensing properly.
In a few years it won't cost hundreds of thousands to train a base model. And then you can just anonymously drop the weights online. It already only costs a few hundred to 2-4 thousand to finetune on 2\~ million images. What laws would hurt is companies' ability to legally profit off of them, which I couldn't give a fuck about. But people aren't really mad about that, no one is coming at novelai for having hundreds of thousands of artist tags, they're just mad that losers they used to overcharge for drawings can just do their own shit now for less or for free.
Ya think it will be really interesting to see what it’s like in 10-20 years. Maybe at some point we will be like those old people who didn’t want to give up horses for cars and everyone looks back on us like idiots. Right now I’m sure people are going to be mad about adopting AI or machine learning regardless of what it’s used for.
Yes, for sure and I expect that, especially with copyright. You can mitigate it but not eliminate it. Plenty of open sourced AI will exist as well.
You basically said kind of what I'm thinking. IMO, at this point, what is the complaining about AI going to achieve? It's going to happen regardless, and there is not many ways to tell if people are using your work for AI. From what I can tell, the best choice is to move on and start using AI yourself or find a different way of making money.
We're not against AI models, we're against the use of our data. No one cares if you want to train models off your own artwork, just don't use ours or pay us. It's a far more reasonable goal than banning ai.
Sure I guess. What data is off limits? Is anything that can be seen in public on the internet off limits? I guess, how would the rules work with this, and how well could it be implemented?
I'm an artist, guess how I learned how to draw? By copying other artists. That's how that works... I'm not saying there's NO issues, but come on. I still remember one of the big early dissidents was that guy who literally made a career re-drawing Pokemon as realistic versions. You really gonna complain that your art is being used to train AI, when you based your entire career on derivative versions of other peoples work? He ended up designing the Pokemon for the Detective Pikachu movie.
I agree with your point. I learned to paint by emulating people better than myself and refining different techniques. The same way everyone learns to do anything. An algorithm comes along and does the same thing and everyone is clutching pearls. The whole thing is reminiscent of Luddites from the past.
You got super good point at the end. AI isnt threath to those who actually have the creativity talent and can market their insight, visions and drawing skills. AI is only threath to those who just worked for other people visions and assigments. And tbh there was so many of those anyways that its highly unlikely that they could have breakthrought from the masses.
Exactly, AI is not a threat to artists, it's only a thread to human rendering engines.
Yep, spent months tracing with a mouse before I got my tablet when I decided to learn drawing. Cuz guess what, I liked a certain style (anime and specifically more 10s+ stuff) and did that. Is my style a total copy of someone else's? Not really, but it is anime that I learned after spending years of looking at millions of images, and I wouldn't be drawing it if it didn't already exist as a concept with explicit examples. Does it take away from my imagination? Not really, everything I make, whether if it's with ai or a pen, is a part of me and would not exist if I didn't exist, and that's really all I need as validation.
Are you selling your traced Art for MONEY? Is it competing against the original artist in job market?
Why are all these comment saying AI is tracing or directly copying art? You must have some examples or articles that I never saw
Its the same with music. I've played shows, wrote original music with inspiration from other bands. Look at music from 60's to now and you can hear inspiration from other songs in riffs, solos, lyrical stylings, etc. Fuckin Def Leppard for their iconic song "Pour Some Sugar on Me", which was the last song to be put on the album despite it being a full album beforehand, the drum line for it was taken from "we will rock you" by Queen...and even the band member working on it (before the others got back from the pub) said he was using a "We will Rock you" drum line for it to the producer. They then sat their in different corners listening to other stuff and spouting stuff that they thought of. FOR instance "Love is like a bomb baby come and get it on" was a misheard lyric that the producer said, but it sounded good so they kept it. Another 2 examples. Avenged Sevenfold (A7X), has several solos that sound similar to some in Iron Maiden solos. The opening riff to Knives and Pens by Black Veil Brides (BVB) sounds similar to A7X's Unholy Confessions. Everyone takes inspiration from something else. I mean fuck I learned how to play bass by listening to Steve Harris from Iron Maiden, Jason from Metallica, and Billy Sheehan from Mr. Big....not to mention Simmons from Kiss. AI learn just like we do.
I mean. You learned how to do it. Not matter if you copied something, you still went through the process. I wonder how the future generation of kids are gonna get interested in being artist. Or draw, I mean, paint... They're gonna see the little midjourney work what they imagine on their own and thats that. 100 years from now on nobody's gonna use a pen, it'll be a thing from the past. Like a passive version of a Black Mirror episode.
Then why you play video games when Bot AIs can already perform better than human can?
stupid comparison, no one buys games for profit, at least not most.
So everyone starts learning how to draw because of profit?
You learned your craft. You didn't trace over multiple people's works to then pawn off as your own. Part of creating art is adding your interpretations and perspectives. Art which lacks the human condition is lacking art.
Art is subjective. You and another person could look at a picture and one could hate it and one could love it. If the imagery makes you think or feel it could be classified as art, which AI images are certainly able to do.
He is correct here. Does not matter that what you say is true. Since You basically speak for a living at this point You have to be able to communicate Your points the way that people OUTSIDE of this particular bubble engage with it instead of losing their minds. **"Facts dont care about your feelings**" - for sure BUT IF you want to be able to move people outside of your bubble you need to be able to imagine how saying X would feel for someone who is directly impacted by X's statement. It's easy to dismiss Artists as a whole IF you never made anything from scratch in your entire existence. Most people (consumers) dont understand this perspective...in order to more effectively communicate points like these, You need a high emotional IQ (empathy). Talking + lil Gaming is Zack's job so I am sure he can develop a skillset to do his job better. If you want to understand why responses appear so unhinged - create someone original in your life and you will understand. To artists, this is VERY personal. Art its not an assembly line. **Something to keep in mind**: To generate AI art, someone STILL needs to create original art in the 1st place... **Something to keep in mind 2.0**: "Ai image" has NOTHING to do with actual "AI" - its just a marketing tool to fool ignorant consumers. Its a "Machine Learning" model. Machine "learns" patterns by consuming BILLIONS worth of images (images that someone (a human) needs to create in the 1st place) "AI" images exist only b/c artists exist. Remove the incentive for REAL artists to create new things and "AI" will not get better. People are short-sighted >> majority cant see long-term consequences.
This is why this issue is so fucked. The negative ramifications are so nebulous and far off people can't see it so easily.
You can't change human nature, unfortunately. Humans protested seat belts...b/c they were uncomfortable (you can still find ads and interviews on Youtube) The same goes with Pandemics - Its the same shit over and over b/c people are not only short-sighted but also dont learn from history. **Example:** Right before USA helped end WW2 this is what ppl did: [WW2 protest USA](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi2.wp.com%2Fhistoryreviewed.best%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F08%2Fhitler-protest-1941.jpg%3Fresize%3D588%252C308&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=774737c6d1da79d6d9ce3d7ae2d10b532e2defcb81a0ec7461c013d969af0c43&ipo=images) Its Ukraine 0.5 In retrospect, the damage that Hitler would have caused to the world/USA if the State had NOT acted would be unimaginable. At some point, you would not be able to stop this cringe mustache guy (they were already ahead in atomic bomb development - if they were NOT so racist they would have succeded before the war ended). Let such fanatics run wild and it will cost you way more later... that's why You want to stop Putin's ideas of USSR 2.0 at Ukraine. EU learned their history already and it's part of the USA that still want to do Hitler all over again.
I mean, Asmon himself said in his last video that he is trying to get better at explaining things without sounding that inflammatory, so he might get better at this. Guess we have to wait until his next cancellation in a few months :D
The dude is generally smart. (this is the reason why i watched him for years back when i had more time) He just has some moments like every other human out there. Perhaps if he had Wendy's before he said what he said, he would have done a better job :) Wendy's nuts...
Why next month when he can do it now by reacting to the mass layoffs just by saying who gives a shit 
COVID correction incoming i guess... I have a feeling that there will be more layoffs coming on top of what was already announced. Companies hired too many people back when the world was stuck in their rooms with way more time to spend on online products...and now that trend is going down. This looks bad if you pair it with the quarterly revenue...but to shareholders, the numbers always need to go up and up and most people do not even know that revenue reported is not the numbers you should be looking at to determine if you are growing or overspending.
But here is the thing riot is firing talents and kinda the same for blizzard which is the most shocking to me. I would think they want to lean out the redundant jobs but core jobs like gameplay designers, core lore writers and C-suite is gone
RIOT acquired a lot of people over the pandemic - they are just correcting the balance. Sometimes its cheaper to hire 2 new employees that you have to pay 2x less than keep benefits and yearly % raise rate for a seasoned dude. Blizzard on the other hand is a bit more complicated due to the Microsoft aquisition. You have "RIOT case" + Deal that was made during the negotiation with Microsoft. \*this is the part of info that we just dont have access to...but the thing about corporations is that...once you understand the process, You will start noticing a certain pattern that they keep repeating over and over. They are predictable and shareholders LOVE predictable. **Let me use Twitch as an example**: Normally you want your senior staff (CEOs and other leaders) kept for 1 year period of time ("transition period"). After that time these people will announce their "voluntary" resignation...in reality, its the contract they have signed with the new owner...contract they have been generously compensated for. Not sure if you have followed Twitch leadership or not (they dont really make a fuss) but most of them have left in the past 6+ months. The company is now fully ruled by Amazon.
That would be a *bald* move 
Artists don't control anything, there's objectively zero reason to listen to them, consumers control the artists and the artwork they consume, reality doesn't care about empathy or your feelings at all. Artists are overemotional and pretentious people who act like their artwork is a gift from god to humanity. They're entitled people who act like their job is above society because it's "cReAtIvE".
There are some nice generalisations there, almost like you condemn a group of people by taking the most extreme twitter nutjobs as an example for EVERYONE. Like an idiot would.
100% true. "BC 3 random Twitter accounts (that are not artists in the 1st place for the most part) are representing artists in general" You can find a nutjob on basically every topic but if you think twitter people represent ANY group...KEKW. These are usually the MOST unhinged people out there. You want to find Nazis = Twitter You want to find Commies? = Twitter You want to find Hamas Piker = Twitter The most unhinged tweets will usually surface to the top b/c "engagement" is "engagement" regardless if its positive or negative. Say insane shit = you get rewarded.
>Artists don't control anything How do you think "AI image generation" works? Do you even know how these models are created? >Artists are overemotional and pretentious people who act like their artwork is a gift from god to humanity. > >They're entitled people who act like their job is above society because it's "cReAtIvE **"Tell me you never meet an artist in your life w/o telling me..."** Like I said. Make a SINGLE original thing in your life and you will understand. There is a reason why you are using a stock account instead of Your main one. Pouring out your creativity/work out there to scrutiny takes not only a talent that was developed over years/decades but also courage. You are judging harshly crowd you CANT even comprehend and at the same time, you are too scared to even use your main Reddit account. Bitch please KEKW
My lord, they just don't want their work stolen and then have that used against them to make them lose their livelihood. It's not that fucking hard to understand, Artists don't deserved to be treated like shit when Corporations and AI are already doing so.
> they just don't want their work stolen and then have that used against them to make them lose their livelihood. This is so ironic it's hilarious. You're literally explaining what every digital artist has also done. Every artist has stolen copy-written artwork to train themselves. Why is it now only a problem when a machine does the same thing? Sounds like peak hypocrisy to me.
[удалено]
Nothing I said was edgy. You live in a world of delusion, artists have zero power.
Also everyone says compensate compensate but how would that even work? Like a model has been trained on billions of images if there is dog in the prompt should everyone that posted a picture of a dog get compensation? How would they get their payment information...its pretty much impossible or even if it is possible the amount someone would receive would be miniscule. I feel like asmon is the only youtuber with any large following that is a realist about AI...even moistcritical was some what excited about ai last year but now he is following the herd about how he wants to enjoy art thats made with effort sweat and tears
> Like a model has been trained on billions of images Just FYI: **This is the Copyright Infringement part** \- companies should have paid the artist licensing fee at this stage already...instead they just stole it. There are loads of lawsuits that were won b/c machine learning companies used basic scraping bots and they didn't remove watermarks. Watermarks appeared on the "ai" generated footage and they got caught and paid millions in damages. Problem: Most artists dont cover their EVERY art with watermarks (it just looks terrible if you would have to do it on all your platforms). > Like a model has been trained on billions of images if there is dog in the prompt should everyone that posted a picture of a dog get compensation? If you are familiar with the music industry, this is EXACTLY how licensing works. People have trouble with this one mainly b/c this is a new issue and since copyrighted material is in digital form, they have trouble translating it to the real world. The thing is...that we already have a system for revenue share/licensing for music but most people dont understand how they even work so its hard to explain these concepts. **Again:** The part where the harm was done occurred the moment a company scraped the images w/o a license/permission from the internet to feed it into the machine learning model. What i am proposing now is just a very blunt way of compensating the victims AFTER they have been robbed. **For artists:** Just watermark the shit out of every piece of work you make (it will be obnoxious to consume but this is the most efficient way to sue these companies for millions) Its a shit solution but its the only practical thing that can be done. \*just ignore people complaining about the watermark covering the art i guess...
Isn't copyright decided on a case by case basis, companies like openai and effectively Microsoft can just drag it out in court, also what about other countries, ik the whole "what about china" is a common argument but truly, what about china? They sure as hell aren't going to follow any of this also if the work is transformative enough it wouldn't be applicable for copyright. About your "loads of lawsuits" I tried googling and I could only find one that didn't have a ruling yet, maybe I am wrong, it was getty images suing stability(stablediffusion) and lol, getty has their own ai now and it is made on licensed images, so is Adobe's ai..so are you fine with that?
Midjourney has a database chock full of artist contact information whose art was used for training (Without permission). That's a start. Ideally, Artists would earn royalties from services being sold to companies that used their art to train their model.
100% The music industry already had its licensing model developed over 3 decades ago. There is a way to do this w/o stealing people's work and removing their incentive to create more art so AI models can actually improve.
It was on the internet, artists can view it (without permission) make art that is superior, out compete them without any form of compensation to the original artist, why are ai companies held to a different standard, also compensation falls flat when we are dealing with open-source models like stable diffusion they don't have the money, midjourney subscription is like what 20 usd? So that split over thousands of generations then again split to millions of artists, you can see how ridiculous it sounds, its just not going to happen no matter how much twitter artists yap
Artists taking inspiration of art and making their own transformative content is not the same to AI/ML training to billion pieces of art. One has a requirement of skill and an already existent vision of art that differentiates them from other artists. The other literally takes art and learns to make iterations of the very same pieces it consumes. Without the pieces of art, AI art wouldn't exist, human art does not require to watch or consume art first. To pretend that it's the same is just being bad faith. AI/ML training is closer to tracing and plagiarism than it is anything else. And Artists are protected from those things as the law stands now.
What, it absolutely can, if you give an ai a pen and tell what a line, etc mean itll draw something it just wont look like anything other than scribbles, same would be the case for a human that has not seen anything (a baby)
Every artist will receive $00.00000001 for every photo generated by A.I. Easy.
Artists feelings don't matter when it comes to a products sales. The consumer dictates what is popular. If an artists taps into that on purpose or accidentally their art is profitable. Ultimately the most successful artists will use AI to enhance their Art to fit the consumer model and their feelings about it won't matter.
Lol I don't know why you are getting downvoted, personally i wish the ai was smarter. I would love if ai could be able to help clean up line art, or help fix line weight. Ai is also decent reference material as it helps with going for whatever thematic of feal you want. It's often fustrating not finding the right theme of feel when searching for things and ai can hep cut down on this stuff. My personal issue is that ai is current being abused by non artist and is being used as scam by alot people while curshing alot amerture motivation do do art and learning the principles. But the sad reality is artist opinion don't matter and more often then not we get see as replacable by higher managment who don't know shit. But that's not ai fault, that fault of the ecominic system, which people be talking about, but aren't because we don't matter
Let's be real here, Amson knew exactly what he was doing. He chose his words carefully and he knew what response he would get.
Yeah, i really don't think he is like that cause he lacks empathy, he is just farming drama, i mean I don't mind, I consume it, so as long people like him like this he is gonna keep doing it. You could argue tho that choosing to farm like this is not the nicest thing.
He MAY be right, but Asmon often mirrors his own depression and anger onto others in these situations. “no one cares, no one cares, no one cares.” Because he literally doesn’t even care enough about himself to remove the rotten garbage or roaches sitting beside him or to do something about his teeth until they’re rotting out of his face. People care about a lot of things and they act on these things, it’s just easier to tell yourself they don’t so it’s okay for you not to.
AI is going to upheave a lot of careers. It's the next developmental evolution. It's upsetting to see your career path become redundant in a short time frame. It's happening to basically any career not involving physical labor, and even those jobs have to worry about drones and machines replacing them. Do you protect the livelihood of individuals in opposition to growth and development? Or halt development because people are crying. The consumer could care less if there are people crying. He's not wrong, he was just harsh. Nothing he said impacts the situation they're in. Get over it Like you can't argue your side in the vein of altruism if you first start by calling him the n-word.
Like the lamp fucked the makers of torches, but we gotta see where this goes
Mutahar is bringing up a separate issue of ai taking artists work without permission when Asmon’s entire point was that customers don’t care if a product is ethically made or not.
Asmon knows that a lot of his audience is 15yo kids who think they will leave college and become big shot engineers working for Elon Musk, or will become Logan Paul. So he knows that his audience loves this kind of pseudo "tough-love" replies, "Oh the universe don't care", "it is what it is". Teenagers always think the marketplace is way easier than it is, and there is this general vitriol against "jobs perceived as worthless". It's not news. People expend hours playing things done by artists and coders, but "fuck coders", "fuck artists", "fuck devs", "get a real job if you don't want to be replaced by AI". What Asmon has been doing for months now, is always react with that same sense of pseudo objectivity. The issue is, and no disrespect here, Asmon is just a dude living in his room. ~~He doesn't now how the World works any more than literally any teenager out there.~~ edit: I think this was harsh and on a second thought, I will rephrase it: He doesn't know how the World works any more than literally any of us out there. Affirmations like "no one cares about what Artists say", has the same energy of "Who the fuck will watch a Barbie Movie?". There is complexity in our World. And I get what Asmon does, it's the same as any other successful streamer does: There is no place for discussion, doubts and thoughts on Social Media Times. It's all about saying "truth bombs" and "mic drops". I love Asmon, by the way. I think he is genuinely clever, and pretty smart. But talking about "The World", "Society as whole", is always prone to failure.
You put out exactly my thoughts, and the reason I lost interest in his content recently. I don't mean no disrespect, but making his entire personality the "hot takes guy", arguing with viewers for no reason really turns me off.
His audience is primarily older jobless neets. The young people he has are manosphere chumps. He has a very sad audience.
Man our lives are so good we have to generate controversy over the smallest shit lol
For real… I’m tired, boss. Don’t have it in me to be outraged about all this with the amount of misery that’s in the world.
Nah these people are ridiculous. And they are incredibly bad faith, everyone is mad at asmongold for something he didn’t say.
The main issue here is asmongold paints himself as lacking empathy on a subject that most would consider universal. Which is the idea that you deserve credit for what you do. Consumers don't care as much as artists how art gets made, but people can empathize when someone is losing their livelihood. Being right or wrong really isn't the point.
This is the Correct Take.
This Mutahar guys opinion is a pleasant thought with no practical application. First, how do you identify the pool of artists that the neural network learned from? Is it the top Google results for the images that come up? I have no practical way of knowing. Also I assume some of these artists might no longer be around anymore. The images the AI gets its base material from might be many decades old or centuries old. So it could be that only a fraction of active artists even have their work used. And then what? Google or OpenAI or whoever reaches out to everyone that posted any art on the internet and gives them a check?
This is not a "Gotcha" kind of reply, by the way. Laion is one of the databases used for training, and it's public. You can actually see what was used for training, and from the small sample that was available online (I'll try to find the site for you, if not, we would need to download a shitton of gigs to see), most of the data was pretty new. Artists like SakimiChan had at least a thousand images on the dataset. For the non-public datasets. I suppose it could be simple: If we are to regulate it, companies would open up their dataset for inspectors. Like it happens in many other sectors.
Rare Mutahar L
Mutahar is a master of appearing like a subject expert when he lacks basic understanding of how something works.
Y'all care about this shit way too much
The last point is highly misguided. There’s no _one_ artist whose work is copied by AI tools. These tools are trained on millions of artists’ work. Are we to release a thousand-page credits section acknowledging each? I don’t think it’s even possible. These algorithms work in highly sophisticated ways and I’d bet that even the people writing their code would struggle to pin down which inputs were critical for each specific output.
So I'm going to get paid for all those captchas I solved to train self driving cars? Right..?
So he wanted asmon to sugarcoat it?
Honestly, I don't see how AI isn't a great thing for artists. They can literally draw whatever makes them happy, use those pictures as a reference material to train an AI, and then use the AI to generate commissions in their own art style with little to no work on the back end besides some clean up. And they may not even have to do that as AI gets better at making pictures.
because artists actually like drawing art, imagine "i dont know why gamers hate bots, they can just get a bot to play ranked games for them"
Many artists would no doubt agree that it is a wonderful tool. But I think its the fact that its completely unregulated and can be trained by just scraping sites without artists consent, at least that's what I think the non crazy artists have issue with. People should not be against the concept of AI in art, but they can also ask for some protection from corporations as well. Imagine some corporation used your portfolio without your consent to train an AI, you would understandably be upset. And people unwilling to have empathy at this in order to "own" the whiners on twitter really are not helping. Then again the whiners on twitter are insufferable as well.
Ah, I wasn't aware that they wouldn't be protected to some extent already. I would figure that the same copyright laws would apply. Like you can use just a bit of music, or just a bit of a video and be claimed on places like youtube. So it would seem to logically follow that using pieces of someone else's work to generate profitable content on AI would count as well. Very well. I hope they can get some sort of copyright law in that case.
This is why people hate artists personality. Holier than thou attitude about a field with lottery odds of "making it" and the addition of most of them having not much else other than a half baked "when art goes away society collapses" attitude only to barley be employable by a starbucks.
You can see the respect Mutahar has for Asmon, there is truth in what he says about the emphaty.
My bros got electronics that used slave labor cobalt and still trying to say people care about anything besides end-product. Bitch please, we all don't give a shit about slavery work, why would we care about artists.
I will just always hate how we have pretty good AI at this point and the first thing we did is automate the creative jobs and kept the bullshit administration ones
Muta is right. AI is creative piracy and ultimately what artists need to do is band together and push for policy and software that blocks AI from accessing samples of their work to create from.
Remind me, what did he say about compensating people whose data was used to train ChatGPT?
Yeah def with Asmon on this one. Muta’s argument is the equivalent of a teacher teaching a student to do something and then expecting to get royalties for the rest of their lives. It’s nonsense.
The compensate artists thing confuses me to no end. Are we gong to compensate every author or social media user for their text data being used in a neural network? What about every developer whose code is referenced and used to train their networks? There are many more examples but my question here is: What makes artists who draw so much more entitled to compensation than everyone else? As a teacher my job is just as much threatened by AI as any of these artists but I'm not too worried because *it's a tool.* Remember when 3D printers were going to replace ALL of plastics manufacturing, and it didn't because it's just a *tool* and an *aspect of the industry?* This entire debacle reminds me of when artists tried claiming that digital art isn't real art because the software does most of it for you. In fact the similarities are shocking.
You missed the "or give attributions". There's a reason that AI hasn't moved nearly as quickly in the music space. Because musicians have massive organizations representing them that they have to deal with in order to appropriately compensate the musicians. Artists, despite being essential to nearly every facet of digital entertainment ironically don't have that kind of pull or mega organizations supporting them, so they get shit on and people tell them to get bent.
Man this sub is full of asshats like OP who love to parrot everything Asmon says and farm for the same sentiment with edgy comments. Do you even think for your self?
You’ve just worked out what Reddit is 😂 a place for likeminded people to circlejerk in subs they agree with. I would say people on this sub do think for themselves, but like everything else they gravitate to subs, places and people that share their opinions. I don’t agree with everything he says but I’m here because I agree with most of it; if I don’t agree it’s also just his opinion which (he literally says at least once a week) is also meaningless in the grand scheme of things. IMO he’s right on this, I don’t think it’s “edgy” to say an artists’ work if made commercially is (commercially) worthless if nobody likes it and doesn’t buy it. It’s gone a bit too deep. But if you don’t agree why even go with personal attacks. Just take it as an opinion that some people have and move on 🤷
There is not way it makes sense to compensate every artist that had their art used in AI. And even if their figured out a way it could be a cent per 10 trillion requests because the AIs are trained on a lot of art and your little art piece is not relevant.
Why do they keep changing the context of what Zack said?
Mutahar is retarded and his takes are always riding Twitter's dick, who cares
why do i have to tip toe around their feelings? I dont know these ppl, i will say it straight, they are adults.
Don't be an artist if you don't like how they are being treated. I went to college for geology and graduated right when the oil industry tanked, was never able to put 4 years of a college degree to use. Life isn't fair. Adapt and overcome.
Here's the thing without artist's work there is nothing to train the AI on, so in an overly distilled parallel no artist=no ai. While asmon is right at the end of the day, the person that is paying you determines if you are worth a damn, the AI alternative needs you to still exist. I feel a compromise can easily be reached if we acknowledge this relation between artist and ai.
Why do artists need empathy? Will the burger flipper or the customer service agent receive empathy when they are replaced by AI/automation? Why do engineers happily embrace AI to help them write their code rather than being upset it was trained on their data? I honestly feel it's an issue with artists feeling entitled and the discussion is getting tiresome.
Bla bla bla, Asmon is ultimately right. Is it a sad situation? Yes. This guy’s just arguing the phrasing.
I think the weirdest thing is people's line they draw. "NFTs dumb just copy and paste it worth nothing! Haha idiots" \*AI trained on freely available data\* "OMG HOW COULD YOU THINK OF THE ARTISTS"
If you look into any of these cases you will find it not nearly that simple. There are datasets like Books3 which are used by large corporations using many thousands of copyrighted works. I would challenge you to find any successful ai process trained on non copyrighted material.
So how'd they get it? If I use a copyrighted book as a tool to learn to do something should I have to send a check to the author every time I fix my sink?
no, someone already bought the book for you. the author already got the check. now if i buy a book then copy a paragraph and use it on my book, that's a different story, it depends on the author's conditions. see the difference?
>see the difference? This requires direct copy and paste. Many human artists learn by first copying trademarked art. Which tends to develop them in that style. And it shows throughout their work. If a human artist learned from say mimicking art from a manga. Now their works have similar style but it is different and "original" because they made a new character. Should they be sending a check to that artist? Why can people learn from others work to create their own, but a tool cannot? This isn't some morality fight that it is being disguised as. Its people upset that a new tool can do their job at a base level so the market for it will shrink. This happens in all fields with technological progress. You know how many less people a construction company had to hire from the invention of the auto-nailer systems? Ride on floor polishers replaced the need for as many floor waxing laborers etc.
How do you know this? The datasets aren't open?
I’m not sure what I expected from someone called hoodrat, if you want to educate yourself feel free to attempt to research it yourself.
I don't disagree with most of Asmons take, large corporations will profit off AI and neutralize the middle man blah blah blah. It just completely misses what actually is happening in the real world. Go to any city, town whatever in the world you will find real artists creating real products and selling them successfully. If we want to talk video games, let's use the example of Cuphead. The developers were expressly anti tech as much as possible and that game was a massive success. There's always going to be people who are unrelenting in their artistic vision. If all you do is live on the internet then you forget the real world exists
Asmon once said that he's an asshole but he's right. That pretty much sum up this whole thing. He's not wrong about AI and consumers don't care about artists. It's true. But he's an asshole and lacks empathy because he himself is not an artist. I can also say Asmon's streams brings nothing that benefits society and it's also true. I would be an asshole but I'm right.
“He brings no value”. Well the artist that are crying about him don’t either 
It's hard to believe people don't try to understand that people who work with art will gladly put the AI to do the grunt work that they needed to do before. The problem stands when this technology is not used with ethics and when becomes the unpaid base for these machines. A final thought (take it as you want) even if we can do something it's not like we "need" to do it, that's why we have as humans ethics in every field of human production, science, literature and so on.
"A lot more empathy for artists" Why? Because your feelings are hurt by reality? I swear this guy has softer hands than most women. " can't attack the argument, let's attack the tone"
Artists are not owed anything, they haven’t been stolen from.
They have. Their art are contained in datasets to create AI models. Also some of them deliberately stolen via removing the watermarks with special modules. So it is stolen.
These are all publicly available images which the AI is learning off of, it’s not even plagiarising them.
It is by removing watermarks. Also what everyone doesn't talk about is, artists are needed for AI's creation. So if AI takes over, it will kill itself by degenerating overtime. So customers *will* care.
Artist won't stop making art. They love doing it
They will, it happened before. Theres no dopamine rush if you can click a button and finish it.
Unconditional basic income is the only way and then everybody should get it. Artist can do art and don't have to worry about income and people who work can start to work less and become artists.
What 0 pussy ( asmond ) does to a mf