You must log in or register to comment.
Please put NSFW tag on this…
If this was an email conversation where someone had commissioned David the Gnome with a pound cake, and then once they saw the result asked for more cake, people would think it’s hilarious.
deleted by creator
“No one is better because he is bigger.”
Doing the Lord’s work
This is why Miyazaki is so against AI. Man can’t handle the junk in the trunk.
Humans: “I just can’t understand why sentient AI would go rouge, probably something just went wrong with it’s programming”
Also humans:
go rouge
Leave the bat out of this.
I think the hypothetical threat of rogue AIs get’s too much attention compared to AIs that are obedient but evil by design.
Submissive and breedable ai
If you made it any bigger, it would turn into Plasma.
I’ve scrolled through here like four times today, and still the gnomes ass is no larger. WTH is wrong with AI these days?
deleted by creator
The big booty Ghibli styled gnome or not making it’s butt even bigger?
deleted by creator
“I’m sorry Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that.”
Really gonna need that bicycle built for two now…
Literally 1984
Wow, AI is a coward
Sir Mix-A-Lot would be utterly dissapointed.
Has technology reached it’s zenith?
You may not like it but this is what peak performance looks like.
Maybe an unpopular opinion here, but I feel like posting AI-generated ghibli-style pictures is hugely disrespectful to Miyazaki and all the values he stand for. Miyazaki said once he feels “AI Art” is an “insult to life itself” - and I have to agree, since it strips all the human element art is supposed to represent
This is making fun of the fad. Calm down jeez
Just put the shitpost in the bag
We can simultaneously agree that what’s happening is bad and disrespectful, and still find it funny :3
Sounds to me like Miyazaki needs to lighten up.
You can’t be relaxed about things on lemmy, you have to have an anger boner about anything and everything. Especially if it’s what the groupthink™ has decided we have to hate here.
Sounds to me that you need to become a bit more human and empathic.
But daddy elon told me empathy was bad
Come on. Public figures need to be able to deal with satire and mockery, and this isn’t even a deep cut. Besides, have you seen how Miyazaki treats his family? That man has no empathy or humanity to offer his peers either. He’s a stuck up old man that would do well to come down to earth.
No this ain’t about satire and mockery. This is about preserving human creativity.
Not to be controversial, but genocide is bad
Not to be obvious, but bears shit in woods
Bears, beets, battlestar galactica
That one IS a controversial opinion unfortunately.
I kinda came here to say this. It really doesnt feel right doing that to Miyazaki after all the passion he put into the world. This is a slap to the face no matter the context. It is against his every wish.
slap right in the disappointingly unreenlarged buns
(sorry)
That quote is taken totally out of context
https://youtu.be/ngZ0K3lWKRc is the original context. I’d say it fits what I said perfectly
It’s been a bit since I saw the original behind the scenes vid or whatever it was, what was the context?
Ok… but is the picture art??? I don’t think anyone would try to argue it is. Miyazaki was specifically talking about how no algorithm can produce art, and I agree.
What makes this screenshot funny is the human element, the performance! It’s all ridiculous.
Glorified Matrix Algebra: [Presents an image of a caked-up gnome]
Internet goblin: “Make it’s butt even bigger.”
Glorified Matrix Algebra: “Sorry, that’s a bridge too far for me.”
Is the original image art? Who’s to say.
But turn that image into a meme and it does become art. And that’s wonderful.
Is digital art itself bad, because its not the human doing all of it?
Is it ableist to not define AI art as art, when handicapped people can’t perform the same actions?
Does it not create an abundance of art, and thus expands the entire field making it evolve well beyond its current state?
Gate keeping art is silly regardless, you can’t stop it. Just be happy you could make people pay for it while you could, like coal shovelers and blacksmiths things change.
Is it ableist to not define AI art as art, when handicapped people can’t perform the same actions?
Please reconsider this like of argument in the future, it just comes across as cynical using the disabled for arguments sake. There are plenty of blind/deaf/handicapped/motor impaired/etc people making art of various forms. Deaf musicians. Blind painters. Non-verbal writers.
What makes art, “art” is the human creativity of original thought and intrinsic meaning, even if it is derivative. A jazz beat sampled on a rap track is art because it has social/familial meaning - beat makers often unwittingly share their childhood memories listening to their parent’s music at home. A painter may be influenced by their surreal visions, or the war and horrors they witnessed.
Is digital art itself bad, because its not the human doing all of it?
It is bad primarily because it plagiarizes historical art in order to undermine the professional trade for future artists.
It forecloses art as a career, thereby depriving future generations of evolution in style and professional craft.
Gate keeping art is silly regardless
The gate being constructed fences off professional artists from the revenue their work produced. And in doing so, it defunds the schools and studios where professionals pass their craft from master to apprentice.
With tablets and software its easier than ever to produce and share art, it doesn’t have to be a job any more because its so easy to produce and share. It’s not a bad thing, we can create whatever art we want with ease, unlimited abundance. Let’s not paint that positive reality like a bad thing.
Yes but the question is whether it’s imagined newly by a human, or it comes from an algorithm that only works because it’s combining other people’s existing works.
Tablets and software made things easier for humans, AI just… Makes artists obsolete and if you do create something new, it’ll be ingested too.
I agree with you in the core principle that less work for more productivity is good, but I feel creative work is the one notable exception. We remember a bunch of paintings from centuries ago not because they’re beautiful to look at even, but because these particular artists have found interesting new ways to convey their view of the world or their feelings. AI generating a new version of a Van Gogh painting isn’t as impressive.
Ghibli movies, similarly, have a distinctive art style that reminds you of how these movies have been lovingly made by dedicated artists who poured their souls into it. Using AI to shit out random content with the same style is just blatant disrespect for everything they’ve done. You can use AI to clone paw patrol or something if you want. That’s a merch seller, not art.
It forecloses art as a career, thereby depriving future generations of evolution in style and professional craft.
I hate AI art too, but I don’t think it’s so bad as that. It’s terrible because it uses obscene energy and steals art. But that doesn’t mean anyone actually likes AI art (except people who make it and wish other people would like it).
If you tell me your “art” is AI, then I instantly lose interest (with very rare exceptions that generally use older types of AI, like MGMT’s “When You Die” music video"). Momentarily disregarding economic considerations, AI “art” is to real art as over-processed food is to whole-food, made-with-love meals. Will some people eat it, for whatever reason? Sure. But are Twinkies competing with fine dining? No. I’m interested in art for the relatable human element. If that’s emulated, then you can only hold my interest until that fact is revealed. AI artists can only be disinteresting or deceitful, there’s no third option.
But that doesn’t mean anyone actually likes AI art
Anyone in the business of churning out media slop at high rates and low quality loves it.
Low budget advertisers, propagandists, and click bait influencers are its primary user base.
Art has soul in it. Ai has no soul.
The end. ^^
- he said that about any ai art though and he is right.
- he didn’t say it was an insult to him
- This is a ai generated gnomes butt on a shitpost community, not art
If a miserable old man wants to hatekeep an entire art style then he’s someone that I can safely and happily disrespect.
Rich people like him do not have feelings that matter, he’s wealthy enough to solve real problems but instead he protects his personal legacy and wealth.
Defend capitalism and try to increase the power of the wealthy if you like but I’ll always be on the side of people being free to express themselves regardless of the feelings of a rich old man.
Where do you draw the line, exactly? AI-generated art doesn’t discriminate based on how wealthy the individual whose art it is copying is. Most artists aren’t wealthy. Their work is being stolen just as readily as Miyazaki’s. The fact that Miyazaki’s not using his wealth to help others is completely irrelevant to the conversation.
You know that thing our collective parents do when they want to win an argument so they just start attacking you for random things you did 6 years ago? That’s exactly what this person is doing.
The person above you, I mean.
