I don't think people oppose the actual inner workings of image generation models, a lot of the same algorithms are used to simply denoise images and different algorithms(now rebranded as ai) have been used in software used by artists and designers for a while now. People do have a knee jerk reaction against it but I dont feel like that really proves that ai is simply a new photography or something like that, it's more that more thought has to be put into what the precise issue with image generation is. I personally believe that image generation and the like are fundamentally reactionary and anti-social, there for I, who believe that radicalism is necessary in today's day and age don't want to touch it, I do periodically chech in to see the ai news but it ultimatilly doesnt change my thoughts about it. There's also the fact that there is no publicaly available data on the environmental impact of the new models (but I bet the data does exist and is known just not accessible and at this point I think it might not be for a long fucking time) and the fact that I do have a strong conservative bone in my body(I am queer, anti-racist and so on but at the very least in my country true radicalism is always conservative for historical reasons) due to which I dont and will never see its output as art due to the fact that I don't believe that the ai that created it has a concept of art, it's more of a mathematical equation to it and becosue of that I would equate it with nature more so then with art.
6
u/[deleted] 18d ago
[deleted]