So, the thing making the rounds this week, are a bunch of whiny lib-arts "artists" complaining on social media anytime someone uses AI art, making the argument that "AI art is theft" and how "it's going to put us out of business."
No, AI Art isn't "theft," nor is it going to replace good artists out there. If it does anything, it's only going to replace shitty artists, like you whining on social media that a computer can do an equal or better job at making art than you can, and can do it within seconds, for free. If you're that obsolete, you deserved to get replaced.
There's a lot I could say about this issue, but the simple fact of the matter is, untalented people are always threatened or intimidated when new technology emerges that could potentially replace them or put them out of a job. Like newspaper companies did when radio and television were first introduced. Or zeppelin companies when airplanes and cars became mainstream. Hell, even Bernie Sanders committed massive fraud and corruption of power with his position as a politician in order to protect the New York taxi cab industry in 2016 from emerging competitors like Lyft and Uber. I mean, it is what it is. You can't fight progress (when it's actual progress and not "progressive.") You either learn how to adapt, or learn how to code in another industry.
Besides, usually new technologies create MORE jobs than replace them. One comic book YouTuber, Ya Boi Zack, brought up a good point in how AI art cannot capture mood, emotion, or human subtlety. This is why AI will never replace good human art. I mean, it's been around for literally tens of thousands of years, going back to cave paintings. You think 2022 AI is going to suddenly put you out of a job now, when you probably weren't good enough to be making a living as an artist, to begin with? Okay.
Art is more than just images; it's subtlety, storytelling, and emotion. Since AI art isn't perfect, nor can it ever convey human emotion, mood, tone, drama, etc, these mediocre artists could possibly find their niche in fixing up the problems with the AI art and adding that human flair that they're missing. Someone is going to rise to the top as the best AI-assisted artist this decade, just like people did when it came to YouTube content in the late 2000s or TikTok creators in the past four years.
But of course, it's definitely NOT going to be the lazy, whining losers complaining on social media about how "AI art is theft." Like I said, you can either adapt to a changing world, or just whine some more on Twitter and Instagram every time you see some narcissistic female "influencer" showing off her Lensa medieval art avatars. Many mediocre-to-bad artists often can't even convey these human elements in their artwork, anyway. At least they can learn that, though. And if they can't, then free AI art doing the same thing they do, within seconds, 100% deserves to replace them. It's not like the AI isn't doing something you can't do, already. It just does it quicker. And unless you outright steal someone else's original composition, frame by frame, you can't claim an AI doing something quicker, in a similar art style to your own, is "theft."
Lemme break it down for you one more time, idiot:
You can't copyright style. Nor did you even come up with that art style you were using, to begin with. If a soulless, emotionless computer can "steal your artwork," you didn't create anything worth looking at, anyway. And like Sturgeon's Law says, 90% of everything is shit. Congrats; you're the 90% by your own admission.
You could work to use this AI to your advantage. Or complain like the horse and carriage drivers did to Henry Ford. And if you're not creative enough to figure out how to use it to your advantage, then once again, you don't deserve to call yourself an "artist" with your shitty tracing and recolors that you post up on DeviantArt and charge outrageous prices for, anyway.
Most Helpful Opinions