Then go draw a meme for us to repost. The sentiment and message are what’s important.
Comment on [deleted]
vivi@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
I really wish this AI slop image would stop being reposted.
FenrirIII@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
9point6@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I really fucking hate to be this guy, but here’s me less than 48h ago
FenrirIII@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It’s called a “cross-post” not a repost.
9point6@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I can pretend I love to be that guy if it makes you feel any better.
Either way, all discussion that needed to happen is in the link
kibiz0r@midwest.social 3 weeks ago
The medium is the message.
FenrirIII@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You’re trying to sound deep, but it’s as shallow as a kiddy pool.
Zacryon@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
Why?
can@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Message hits harder when someone put time into it.
xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
if it was the intentional it would make sense?
we have a vaguely stern guy pointing somewhere, apparently that means “blame”, and some money in the background… some drippy stuff… blood i guess?
it would at least be okay if an artist was controlling the ai but this really is slop….
…
this is a common observation and there are many, many
political cartoonsmemes that say the same thing.FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Soulless corpo art.
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
There’s multiple opinions on that. As in why using ai for this specific purpose is a negative. There’s also some for why it is a positive.
The two biggest negatives I’ve seen talked about are supporting the utterly horrible companies behind them, and that doing so removes the human from the process when any given protest movement is about humans.
On the positive side of things is the effectiveness of a given “poster” that a single individual can create with their skills and tools. In other words, not everyone can turn out a poster/meme/sign by hand that isn’t going to be ignored because it’s sloppy and badly executed. That argument tends to be bolstered by corollary that it democratizes production so that anyone, anywhere can take part with a cleaner message.
The other positive I’ve seen argued is that by using the tools of the oppressors, the downtrodden are using their own resources against them. Turning out memes and such would cost some degree of money, power, etc, and the result used to raise awareness against the oligarchy behind the theft of labor that trains the generative ai in the first place.
Which, that one is a damn good argument, imo. Those programs couldn’t do what they do without having human creativity to train from. So using it to attack the very establishment that stole from artists in the first place has a nice bit of irony to it.
I don’t have an emotional stance on the matter. Nor do I have a personal conclusion regarding whether or not AI is an acceptable tool for protest. I’m still thinking about the matter, since I have no pressures to form an opinion quickly.
Now, I have opinions about generative models; since I said they’re a form of theft, I think my opinion is obviously not on the side of the way they were trained. Also, it should be clear that in not in favor of corporate control of a tool like a generative model. However, I also hold the opinion that the existence of them isn’t inherently bad, and that they can be a very effective tool for self expression, even though they aren’t the same kind of tool as a pencil or brush or typewriter. That is tempered by an opinion that such tools should be required to indicate in the output that it was generated rather than created.