Anti-AI tools for user created images

[ASUNDER]

10 hours ago, Mr. Doodlezz said:

You’re absolutely right – it’s frustrating and exhausting to think about creating art when it feels like it’s just going to be scraped or stolen. But there are a few tools that can help push back against this:

(Glaze, Nightshade, Yuify)

I'll have a look at those, thank you.

10 hours ago, Mr. Doodlezz said:

Don’t let them take your joy in creating!

They already have.

10 hours ago, carl123 said:

AI can not take away a true creator's joy of creating, just their income from doing it

People don't create art for themselves.  Anymore than they choose what clothes they're going to wear for the day for themselves.
I could print out my art, put it on my own walls and pat myself on the back if I want.  But that gets old quickly.
Or I could have the joy of making art for a group of fans, that appreciate what I do.  And have a legitimate business that pays the bills, doing what I love doing.  Which isn't a sin, but it becomes a sin when it's just a dream because it's unattainable.  And so I'm truly a starving artist, not because of my skill but because the internet has been taken from those who do good and given to those who do evil.  How many industries is AI forcing into poverty?  All of them?  How much privacy and personal faculty is AI going to take from us?  All of it?

 

8 hours ago, PaulEC said:

True! - But, especially if you make your living from your artwork, it is a bit "soul destroying" to put in hours/days of work to produce something you're really proud of, only to have it "stolen"  by someone typing in a few words in a prompt box! Not that stealing other peoples work is anything new, it's just so much easier and quicker to use AI. 

Ya.  Have a look at why Spotify hasn't done anything against AI music.  You would think that is odd, seeing as it's hurting their catalog and reputation.  Well, it's because they are developing their own AI creator system.  They will have their own fake artists making their own music so they can take all the profits.  That's what's happening.  You don't find it odd that all these AI tools are free or nearly free?  That so much development cost was spent and then they just up and handed it out to the public like that?  The ruling class are keeping the peoples' perception positive towards AI so that the ruling class can openly develop their own systems.  And using us for the beta testing.  Letting the opportunistic thieves ruin the internet so that no one stands against AI because it serves them too.  Giving the raiders the spoils of their raiding so they have an incentive to do it.  So after they've been bribed they turn a blind eye to how dark and twisted this whole thing is.

[Ddgs]

I’m really sad that Affinity have decided to jump on the AI bandwagon with the rest of the sheep. 

[Mr. Doodlezz]

5 hours ago, Ddgs said:

I’m really sad that Affinity have decided to jump on the AI bandwagon with the rest of the sheep. 

Hm, well … I think this needs a bit more clarification:

1. The two machine learning-based features are optional and have to be explicitly installed by each user, so they are NOT installed/activated automatically.
2. The two machine learning-based features are based on pre-trained models (here, however, I would be interested to know what material the models were trained on). Affinity states on the »What’s New«-page that at no time is your user data (i.e. your own image material) transferred over the internet, so no training is done with it. The features work only locally on your machine.
3. The two machine learning-based features have nothing to do with image generation. They are tools designed to make it easier to select objects – nothing more or less.

HOWEVER, one can now wonder what kind of underlying meaning this decision carries. Before and during the takeover of CANVA, it was repeatedly stated that there were no plans to integrate AI into the Affinity Suit. To me, this step represents a kind of break – albeit in a grey area – because the features have to be actively installed by each user.

[Horseflesh]

Personally I like the new tools and I don't have a problem with them.

But, it is a fun and interesting argument. If the tools were trained on human works without proper attribution -- whatever "proper" may mean to someone -- then they are just as bad -- whatever "bad" may mean to someone -- as image generation tools.

By making an optional model download required I think they have done an OK job of navigating these waters.

 

[Mr. Doodlezz]

Well wow, if that isn't an AI-generated response with lots of textbook SEO keywords and tags, basically just parroting what real users have stated in this thread.

5 hours ago, juliacartes said:

it's voice-focused

What’s this have to do with Affinity and/or visual creativity? Nothing, I suppose.

5 hours ago, juliacartes said:

passionate about ethical AI

Sorry, what? Please elaborate on how it’s ethical to rip off and mimic pop culture icons voices to generate shitty, short-lived throwaway content.

Random AI-promoting bots officially arrived in Affinity forums …

[ASUNDER]

Ya that looks like soliciting to me too.

I don't see how glaze style tools are a benefit anyway.  Not only am I skeptical of anything that I can't prove to work (theory is fine but how do you really know an AI system hasn't already cracked this somewhere else?), but that's not where the damage is being done.  Taking the artists' data to train AI isn't destroying the internet.  It's the people who use AI to generate mass produced slop that is squeezing the life out of the incentive to participate in the market.

Just as Ford knowing how to build a truck wouldn't force my own truck building company out of business.  No, the fact that they can pop out a truck every fifty seconds is what makes trying to have a truck business not even worth it to try.

The US Copyright Office just issued a report that agrees there are issues with AI and copyright.  So the White House up and fired the head for that.
That tells us where this is going.  Big gov and big tech need AI for a cash cow, for spying, control, for weapons of war.  So they won't limit people from using AI to steal, kill and destroy because that would also limit themselves in their own interests.  We can't be having that now can we.

[Alfred]

4 minutes ago, ASUNDER said:

Taking the artists' data to train AI isn't destroying the internet.

It isn’t about destroying the Internet, it’s about stealing artists’ intellectual property.

[ASUNDER]

44 minutes ago, Alfred said:

It isn’t about destroying the Internet, it’s about stealing artists’ intellectual property.

When you create an internet you can determine what it's about.

They call it slop for a reason.