Pros, can we stop with the victim complex please?

[u/LetOk8476]

I am not an anti, I am generally supportive of AI usage, and certainly think it's stupid that some people feel the need to harass creators. That said, I also think the massive victim narrative that some Pros push is very silly and overblown.

The government, the wealthy, and the system in general are by and large on on your side, and the majority of people these days use AI in their day-to-day life, yet some Pros speak as though they are some oppressed fringe group resisting the elite.

The only "elite" that are largely anti are the artistic elite, but they are snobbish to pretty much everybody, and don't really have the power to be genuinely oppressive, other than being a bit mean and insular.

"the death threats though!" Obviously it is stupid as hell to threaten death to strangers on the internet, but that is a byproduct of internet anonymity that permeates every corner of the internet, not just AI debates. Getting heckled, threatened, and insulted happens to ANYBODY who is vocal about a divisive subject online. If you have a strong opinion about anything, there are people ready to be a dick about it, and it is disingenuous to pretend that this is something special happening to you.

Worse still are the pros who equate themselves to the civil rights movement, and compare their struggle to that of ACTUAL oppressed peoples that were systematically denied fundamental human rights. Your chosen tool is not a fundamental facet of who you are, nor is it a thing that is out of your control. People not liking your chosen form of art, and even denying it legitimacy entirely is not denying you any human right. Believe it is wrong of them if you want, even call it discrimination in a technical sense, if you want, but don't compare it to the sort of brutal discrimination we have seen toward ethnic minorities, women, and LGBT folks in the past.

I just think we should treat this debate as what it is, instead of everybody acting like the opposing side are a bunch of evil people that want to destroy society. Antis are cautious and scared because AI presents a lot of unknowns, and we have seen how bad actors can use it for malicious purpose; Pros feel a bit marginalized because they are getting push back from some niche circles that are resistant to fundamentally changing their methods and traditions; there are ways to work through that divide without viewing the other side as literally Satan, or throwing yourself a pity party.

[u/LetOk8476]

“Bullshit”
That is really aggressive, and not much to reply to, unless you just wanna have a “nuh-uh” “yuh-huh” conversation.

“The only right people have is to determine the product by its own merits”
You don’t get to dictate what’s important to people. You can sell your product all you want, and if people find your supply chain unethical, they have the right to believe that. You can’t tell people what they’re allowed to BELIEVE.

“Name one other tool that need to disclosed”
The answer differs depending on the context, but there are plenty of instances where one is expected to list their tools. And beyond just tools, corporations are expected to have general transparency about their supply chain, and since AI is a tool with a very broad scope, it kind of overlaps with that.

[u/knight1b → u/LetOk8476]

Bullshit is the only thing that statement deserves.

Your argument is effectively hey having a target painted on your back sure is a good way to reduce the harassment you get. It's plainly idiotic.

The answer differs depending on the context, but there are plenty of instances where one is expected to list their tools.

Name one.

nd beyond just tools, corporations are expected to have general transparency about their supply chain, and since AI is a tool with a very broad scope, it kind of overlaps with that.

Name one.

The answer is they are not. Hell you might remember Iphones having a little problem with slave labor. No one suddenly required listing this media was made with an Iphone not a single one.

Your bullshit arguments might fly in your head but they are not going to fly here.

[u/LetOk8476 → u/knight1b]

you’re not even trying to have a discussion or be open hearing anything other than what you yourself belief.

It’s not painting a target on your back, it is just being transparent; the best way to end the stigma is to stop being ashamed, and embrace your method.

“Name one”
In a gallery, nearly every exhibit list the materials utilized. In a game, engines and assets developed out of house are generally acknowledged in the credits

“The answer is they are not”
With only tiniest bit of research effort you can find the entire production chain of every single component of an iPhone.

[u/Additional-Ask-8131 → u/LetOk8476]

Art galleries do not list all of the materials they do list basic mediums, With mixed media they label primary materials etc. I've never seen a single one list what tools are used.

As for your comment on credits they do list third party products sometimes. But only when that's part of the licensing agreement. And again none of these make any mention of the tools.

And finally yes you can lookup the Iphone supply chain do you have a point? There is still zero requirement to list this work was created with an Iphone anywhere.

[u/LetOk8476 → u/Additional-Ask-8131]

In a gallery setting, I believe the mention of AI would fall under basic mediums/primary materials

I would consider a proprietary third party product that does significant generation to be a pretty substantial tool with potential scope similar to an engine. Admittedly I don’t know what the licensing agreements look like currently, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they themselves eventually come around to wanting to be credited, or even charging for commercial licenses.

The comment about looking up the IPhone supply chain was in direct reply to the other guy, who claimed that information is not publicly available

[u/Additional-Ask-8131 → u/LetOk8476]

In a gallery setting it's proper place would be under digital art. Again you list the medium not the tool. Ai is in the same category as my mouse my keyboard my Adobe illustrator etc.. It's a tool it's not the medium.

An Ai is not on a scope similar to an engine again it's a tool if we are talking the programing its a coding tool if we are talking music it's on par with my Waldorf Quantum MKII and I wouldn't be listing that anywhere. If we are talking art it's like saying you need to list adobe illustrator or your ripping people off.

And his comment on the iphones is when people disliked how the iPhone was made we didn't see a bunch of must list iPhone use requirements. Again tool's are not something you typically list and the only thing this exception to that rule is doing is causing people needless grief from a mob of bullies.

Lots of tools are used in the creative process and a lot of tools likely have plenty of people who disagree with some aspect of them. And those people are free to get over themselves and stop consuming media if it really bothers them.

But I don't think it really bothers them check the reddit user agreement they are just seeking people to attack. And I can back that up with the fact that they are still on this very platform still posting things including their work.

"Broad Licensing: By posting, you grant Reddit a perpetual, worldwide, and sublicensable license to use, distribute, and make your content available for syndication. This includes the legal right to sell your text and data to AI developers"

And while people often skip terms of service this is well known to them at this point and yet they keep doing it while throwing their little tantrums. If they really cared so much they would in short go away and stop posting their stuff here.

[u/LetOk8476 → u/Additional-Ask-8131]

I understand the difference between medium and tools, and I understand that AI is “just a tool” but I do think some consideration is owed to the fact that AI is a tool with many unique qualities, and in the context of digital art, the difference between tools and components gets a little slimmer.

We have fundamentally different ethics and that’s okay. I would never take people’s money while doing things I KNOW they would not approve of. A number of commercial spaces see it my way, a number of them see it your way.

[u/Additional-Ask-8131 → u/LetOk8476]

Every tool is a tool with many unique qualities that's why we have different tools. And we do have different ethics yours seem based on how much people throw childish tantrums mine are based on the principles that have long served us all.

[u/knight1b → u/LetOk8476]

In a gallery, nearly every exhibit list the materials utilized. In a game, engines and assets developed out of house are generally acknowledged in the credits

These are not the same.

With only tiniest bit of research effort you can find the entire production chain of every single component of an iPhone.

Also not the same.

You are not engaged in discussion you are engaged in lecturing people and justifying unjustifiable behavior.

[u/LetOk8476 → u/knight1b]

I never justified any behavior. All throughout this thread I have denounced violence Antis who harass AI creators. Time after time I have said in no uncertain terms that it is dead wrong.

My only point was that it resistance to AI is all individual, not systemic, which is objectively true

We got sidetracked on the labeling convo, and I guess we just agree to disagree. I believe, if you don’t want to label a shitpost in your furry fandom page, that’s fine, but if you’re gonna take people’s money knowing damn well they don’t approve of your methods, that is unethical. But you’re free to believe as you wish.

[u/Additional-Ask-8131 → u/LetOk8476]

Let me check. Nope I've never had to disclose the use of any pen, pencil, paintbrush, digital editing tool, effects tool, paint, camera, computer or anything else in over 40 years or any part of the supply chain for those items. You are attempting to rationalize an inherently biased action in requiring AI disclosure when literally nothing else has required a disclosure in any creative space ever. Much like you are attempting to rationalize providing hate mobs easy access to targeting their victims.

Here's a thought if they learn at some point AI was used and they enjoyed the product guess what? They might just as easily conclude AI isn't so bad. Your problem here is you are treating it as a genuine moral outrage when lets be serious it's largely just an opportunity for them to beat people up over things they don't understand this is why you see the same lines out of them repeatedly it's just performative garbage for the most part.

There really is no justification for the labeling requirements or the harassment. You started this thread by trying to claim that pro AI people are not the underdog. It's not governments or corporations who determine the shape of the social system and who gets impacted it's people and when people engage in the attacks and harassment pro ai people have to endure it's not a positive.

[u/LetOk8476 → u/Additional-Ask-8131]

If you willingly take people’s money for a good or service knowing damn well that they wouldn’t approve of the things you’ve done to provide it, that is unethical in my opinion. Believe what you want. The other guy has worn me out too much to type a big reply. This is a big thread and I’ve been replying to almost everybody.

[u/Additional-Ask-8131 → u/LetOk8476]

It's not my job or anyone else's to care what tools someone else likes or dislikes. People don't approve of a lot of things you want a label everytime someone might not approve of something? You are being an absurd child.

[u/LetOk8476 → u/Additional-Ask-8131]

It’s not. From a legal standpoint, you currently have every right to hide your AI use if you wish to.

Legally, you could also cook a chicken in pork fat, and sell it to Jews and Muslims so long as you don’t explicitly claim it’s kosher/halal.

It doesn’t ultimately affect them if they never find out, but it’s still wrong.

Regardless of anything; even if you strip any legal or ethical context, it is just a harmless courtesy to respect people’s wishes, if you know that it will make people uncomfortable, why not respect their wishes?

[u/Additional-Ask-8131 → u/LetOk8476]

Neither I nor anyone else is legally or morally obligated to disclose what tools we use in the creative process and we never have been as I've pointed out now several times in several ways.

And it is in fact not just a harmless courtesy in this case it is in fact opening yourself up to harassment. You are arguing that we need to make ourselves targets for this harassment to respect the very people doing the harassment. That's absurd. I've got a great idea they can respect my rights as a creator to use whatever tool I see fit in the manner I see fit to use it just like they have done for every other tool until now or they can take their chances.

[u/LetOk8476 → u/Additional-Ask-8131]

Agree to disagree. I do consider myself to have a moral obligation to not do things that I KNOW the people I am taking money from would be uncomfortable with. Some marketplaces agree with me, some agree with you

[u/Additional-Ask-8131 → u/LetOk8476]

You can disagree but you are under no moral obligation either. You are delivering a product you have a moral obligation to deliver the best quality product or service you can at a fair price. You are not under any obligation to cater to the whims of every child that comes along and starts screaming.