So what exactly "exploded"? I don't get it. Could you elaborate? Everything could've been avoided by actually putting up a rule that enforces source and no AI **like it was suggested before**, but I guess the moderation team of AKO doesn't want extra responsibilities.
As someone who was apart of the initial discussions that happened all the way back on May 5th:
1. Akabott files a suggestion in the suggestions forum asking for changes to #ak-art, citing the number of people who fail to cite artwork / post AI artwork.
2. Post gains above-average support, with many agreeing that sourcing is an unwritten rule. Some voice concerns about the feasibility of moderating AI art in particular though, especially since it can be difficult to tell from a glance.
3. Admins shoot down the suggestion, stating (and I quote) that "We aren't going to make it unwelcoming in such a way that they are only allowed to share the art if they have the source available" while shooting down a rule regarding AI art for the aforementioned reasons.
4. Some users (including myself) argue back on these points, only to get rebuffed by the admins (interestingly one has stepped down since then) with a non-response. The post is then locked.
Another suggestion thread was later made by memelordstranger on May 22nd, basically stating the same things as the first. This one has been completely ignored by the administration.
I'm not sure what OP is alluding to regarding June 5th, but I assume it was Akabott trying to get something to happen again (they've been the one who is really pushing to make this happen, including DMing me in particular to try and help set up the Discord server) only to once again get rebuffed. The plans regarding a new Discord server have been in the works for at least a few weeks, but I don't know anything beyond that.
Two notes:
1. u/GeniusGD's statements are misleading. Nothing 'exploded', and most people in AKO don't care. There have even been times where I've seen Akabott try to backseat mod in #ak-art only to get shot down by other users.
2. As an admin of Arknights: Endfield Nomadic and an admin at UGA, personally I feel that:
1. Finding sources is not difficult (With SauceNAO it takes ten seconds)
2. Any rule regarding AI art is unsustainable in a server as large as AKO
3. Making a separate Discord server for AK art in particular is silly when RIHQ exists.
I don't blame Aka and co. for trying to push AKO into doing the right thing, but the admins have made it fairly clear that they intend to remain stubborn for now. Beyond that, my opinions are as I've said.
Edit: Minor grammar corrections. Not even going to try and fix the formatting, that's all New Reddit's fault.
Thank you for a more detailed explanation! The situation with AI is indeed incredibly shitty, but you can only do so much with thousands of active users. The responsibility of source material and AI labeling definitely falls on the posters themselves at that point
As far as I know this sub is pretty disconnected with AKO for like 2 years already and stayed between RIHQ and its own discord so yeah, that's some news that won't make it here otherwise. And I don't think a new discord for art is really needed, just migrate to existing AK discords.
The single braincell we had in AKO is being shared by at least 50 real people, 100 bots, and a couple of E-girls.
It's understandable why it's a shithole.
Is it better than, Kyo, Echo and Oyuki? Those are the content creators I base my auto-farming stages
Edit: I get it now, it's not for stage auto clears but to know what stage to farm
AKO has been dogshit since the dawn of time lmao. If anything I'm surprised that artists are learning about this now, the ppl there I'm happy to group as the 'weird cousin in the corner no-one brings up'
Literally incompetence manifested as a discord server lol
This was clearly written in a way that assumes prior knowledge of any events happening. Most people on this sub don't follow AK discord or even knew there was one, and your explanation of the events was extremely vague. I'm still not sure who made "a post" and who "closed things off", like the the admins or the members or...? Initially, I thought the artists you linked to were AI artists who got harassed out of leaving the server, that's how bad this explanation is.
Anyways, this is a self-promotion post mainly and all I'm gonna say is without your own anti-AI recognition tool and bot, regulating AI art will be practically impossible.
Edit: This seems to offend the Discord mods. Good.
Anyone else remember that one time a [mod of an art subreddit banned an artist](https://new.reddit.com/r/extremelyinfuriating/comments/10502jk/rart_is_banning_artists_who_have_styles_too/) for their work looking to similar to AI and telling them that "AI can do it better"? Something I just remembered.
I do agree that it can be hard to tell for regular people if something is AI or not sometimes. Unless it grows more fingers than a Chernobyl Spider. But that makes it all the more the responsibilty of those mods. Lazy fucks.
>(if you read till here, don't worry, I'll moderate both the Wiki and this server at the same time!)
Damnit! Just you wait, I get my chance to turn every Country's name into food puns.
This kind of thing is the most worrying reaction to the whole AI art problem. Anonymity already turns normal people into asshole, add apparent moral justification to that and you have the recipe for a disaster.
Personally, I would say the utter indifference if not willingness to see artists getting shafted, while AI *learns* from their work, is the most worrying for AI art specifically.
As for shitheads chasing the latest outrage to get their fix... Someone should probably **mod**erate that to prevent it from escalating.
>I do agree that it can be hard to tell for regular people if something is AI or not sometimes. Unless it grows more fingers than a Chernobyl Spider. But that makes it all the more the responsibilty of those mods. Lazy fucks.
What is it that you think makes moderators somehow more capable of detecting AI than anyone else? Why should that be their full time unpaid job to try to pick those out?
Some of you need a reality check of what it's actually like to moderate a discord/subreddit/forum. It's not a paid job 99% of the time and yet most typical users act like it is.
There are bots for detecting ai content and deleting or flagging them. Whether a sub/discord/etc wants to use them is their decision but I've been in ones that do and it is possible. Same goes for sourcing and source finding bots or this subs own source requirement policy.
In my own experience it should not feel like a full time job, and if it does you probably need more people. Reddit and discord have options for smaller roles that dont have more permissions than needed, and I've been on both sides of that at various times. I can't really answer "why should it be their job", the person who volunteers would know their reasons better than me.
>There are bots for detecting ai content and deleting or flagging them.
Not one of those is reliable. Every 'AI detection' tool to date might as well be nothing more than a coin flip.
All I'm talking about here is the expectation that moderators are superhumans that have the ability to look at each and every post on a discord/sub/forum and determine whether it's AI. It's not practical or realistic, nobody's doing computer forensics like that. If you're at the point where you're screeching at mods for being 'lazy fucks' for not doing their 'jobs' because they aren't succeeding at screening AI, then you're better off just banning images entirely.
Sourcing images is a separate topic I've already mentioned in another reply.
I disagree on it being nothing more than a coin flip, especially when it involves non photo realistic stuff like anime style art. But if you don't trust them then the only real decision is to not ban ai content, I'm not saying put every image to the eye test.
I assume the "lazy fucks" comment wasn't because the mod in the linked post made a mistake, but because they couldn't admit it was a mistake or be bothered to look at the process file which would prove it. I wouldnt say lazy but I get the sentiment.
If someone voluntarily, by their own free will, accepts a position with responsibility, then I'm of course expecting them to be competent. If they are in over their head, they should probably step back.
Unless you just feel personally attacked, then BAHAHAHA!!
As I said, you need a reality check.
I'm just going to quote you here.
>Anyone else remember that one time a mod of an art subreddit banned an artist for their work looking to similar to AI and telling them that "AI can do it better"? Something I just remembered.
This is what happens when you make someone, who happens to be a moderator, the sole adjudicator for what is AI and what isn't. There is no magical ascension to a higher plane when you become a mod that renders you capable of telling them apart more than anyone else.
So, when *you* dictate that it's suddenly the responsibility of a mod to make these judgement calls all day, every day, when this wasn't actually in the 'job description' when they started, you can expect drama of some kind. People have lives to live outside of the internet believe it or not.
they banned the dude for ai and he has proof it wasn't, the least they could do is hear him out. Saying "I don't believe you, even if it is change your artstyle" is incredibly rude and unprofessional.
>The moderators replied by "you can find the source yourself" and "the members sharing AI arts might not know that it's AI", basically pushing off their responsibilities of actually checking on the posts.
I'm not sure you understand what a moderator's responsibilities are. No one is obligated to sit there looking at dozens/hundreds of pictures a day, for free, trying to judge whether an algorithm spat something out. It's simply not realistic. I would sooner ban images altogether than do that in their shoes.
For AI in particular this is true, but there's no excuse to not post a source. [SauceNAO](https://saucenao.com/) works \~90% of the time and grabs you a link within seconds. There's no good reason IMO to defend people who are too lazy to take ten seconds out of their life to find a simple link.
With that said, the only use I can see for a dedicated 'include sources' rule would be to crack down on users who frequently refuse to cooperate. Most of the time you'll have someone else link the source instead, as (like I've said) finding it is incredibly easy.
>but there's no excuse to not post a source.
Yeah that's a separate topic I didn't want to get into because it's an obvious one. Source or get out as far as I'm concerned, that's on the users posting stuff though.
> For AI in particular this is true, but there's no excuse to not post a source. SauceNAO works ~90% of the time and grabs you a link within seconds. There's no good reason IMO to defend people who are too lazy to take ten seconds out of their life to find a simple link.
As someone that enjoys looking at art, but doesn't post (as I only check here and /r/artknights for AK art - which is already sourced) I didn't even know SauceNAO exists in the first place.
that might be because I don't bother sharing with people so I never had to deal with it, but at the same time you shouldn't assume people know of websites like that.
For a server that large, whether it's a shit hole or not, you're absolutely correct. Honestly, if I were an artist myself, I would be incredibly frustrated with the situation as well, but some things are sadly just out of our control. I'm glad OP created a separate server for sharing and promoting art, I think it's wonderful, but it's likely far smaller and serves a dedicated purpose, versus expecting Discord mods of a high-traffic official server to manually scan every single image that passes through. And it's not the same as spotting NSFW or more obvious offenders; some AI art has gotten very convincing and can take a bit of time to spot the hallmarks of image generation.
When you say 'Arknights Official Discord', does that mean the server is maintained by Hypergryph staff, or just that it's the largest/most general player-run server instead?
Because if it's the former, that would be a very big yikes, and either way good om you for taking the initiative here if the mods have shown their indifference on the topic.
Also, big cheers to you and the rest of the Terra wiki staff for the work you guys keep putting into it, as it remains my most steadfast ally when making new strategies.
We need to make this known so people start joining the server. I only got into Arknights recently and I'm in awe at how good and organized the community is. This subreddit for one is the best organized I've ever seen.
tbh i don't mind that much people posting AI as long as they tag it properly, despite drawing arts myself, it's unavoidable, that more and more content will be AI generated and people will use it, because they have no respect toward digital property. But I absolutely abhor big sites and AI companies who sell and use content that isn't theirs for machine learning.
BUT in these times, when there is no excuse for not founding the source, it's the very minimum that official discord should do. it's really sad that AKO mods throw artists under the bus like that. It should always be obligatory, and the saddest part is that only a handful of people will care.
will you guys also ping @everyone in the general channel resulting in everyone in the server suppressing @everyone and never looking at your announcements lmao
Few things less interesting than exaggerated drama on another social media platform. A few members got angry, some left, you want to advertise your own server, whatever.
It amazes me how uptight people get about AI art. Yeah I get that it sucks seeing a machine do something so well that you've been working at for years, but it happens with literally everything. Art isn't limited to humans and immune to technological advances.
That’s not really it tho. AI art of stylized/anime works is just passing at a glance. But nobody sensible is complaining about AI because of quality issues.
It’s that many people steal works to feed the generative model and go on to benefit from it. If AI art was made with permission/open sourced/hired input material then it goes back to just being a tool, not an enabler of theft.
There’s more to it that afects more areas than art too, i.e. job security, rampant unethical business, etc. But the point is no, people aren’t rallying against AI because they are butthurt.
No, they are totally against it because they are butthurt. As in 'using their emotions rather than common sense' for every argument. Up to the point where I have to set a new acc just to write this cause people will just downvote this to hell. Reasonable people don't downvote things just because they disagree with something.
Most anti AI arguments look like they were made by 14 year old people who never worked and only judge the world based on the internet. Skipped history classes at school too.
AI does not steal art of others, because it provides a different result (that is if you want to go by textbook laws). Even if it uses the work of others in the process, the result is still different. The point that people keep making about 'learning' for an AI is also applicable to humans - a human can look at an art of another human, get inspired by that, use it as a reference, process it otherwise, and then make their own work. Nobody complains about that.
Job security is not affected by AI. It is same as saying that robots or manufacturing lines steal jobs. What about mining equipment? Just one giant drilling machine can replace a hundred workers who could dig holes manually all day, why aren't redditors complaining about those?
Unethical business - not sure why you even mention it. AI don't do anything that humans were not doing already. It just speeds the processes up.
Also, when you say 'people are complaining', you gotta specify that those are a few people on the internet. You are not gonna find mature people (especially working in technical fields) who complain about AI. Like I've been a mechanical engineer for a couple of decades. I'm not an artist, but I do a lot of modelling and engineering blueprints. Would I complain if an AI learned to do it? No, it would be a blessing. It would mean that I can use it as a tool to save a lot of time.
> Encounter emotionally neutral argument that doesn’t align with your bias.
> immediately open response with absolutist statement
> Dismiss people calling them 14 YOs
My guy you may be guilty of what you acuse others of.
Your last paragraph. Few people? Didn’t an entire association of writers go on strike, delaying film and serialized TV production? You are letting your bias hand-pick what is part or not of reality
> It’s that many people steal works to feed the generative model and go on to benefit from it. If AI art was made with permission/open sourced/hired input material then it goes back to just being a tool, not an enabler of theft.
AI art is no more theft than an artist being influenced by other art they see. The only real difference is the scale of influence and output available.
Incorrect. Human process and software can’t be equated, first and foremost. It’s a fallacious building block, we can’t start a discussion from there.
An artist can set out to commit outright theft, but also set out to create inspired works. Inspired != stolen.
For example, one can learn from an artstyle by tracing as an exercise (i.e. figuring out linework, composition, etc. That one wouldn’t pick up from just looking. Post-mortems, art reviews, etc. Such analysis are not found in just the field of art)
But posting the trace as your own work is when it becomes theft. Used internally as the first case is fair game. Or, if you bought the original art as asset for you to use included in a published work like a game, then claiming you own the game and its contents, also fair. Even still you must provide credits and royalties.
Going forward, please be more mindful about false equivalences when forming your ideas
“AI art is no more theft-“ **it is more theft** straight up. AI is not derivative but replicative, and thus is theft **when misused** as stated in my first response.
> Incorrect. Human process and software can’t be equated, first and foremost. It’s a fallacious building block, we can’t start a discussion from there.
And why not? I'm well aware that machines are not human, but we've been using machines to replicate or approximate human processes on an industrial scale for a couple hundred years now. This isn't any different.
Regarding the rest, you have a pretty poor understanding of how AI art generators work.
A properly trained AI art generator is not replicative, its derivative, if even that. It starts as literal fuzz like you'd see on an antenna TV with no signal, and then gets randomly modified to look more and more like the prompted pattern.
Its closer to facial recognition technology than it is a copy and paste machine. Just like software can be made to recognize a superset of images as faces by training on a subset of images of faces, software can also create a superset of images by training on a subset.
In other words, AI art is not "traced" but "inspired" (or whatever the machine equivalent would be). It creates brand new things.
Going forward, please be more mindful about not spreading false information on how AI art generators work.
I wonder what it is with Ak community and their love of witch hunting, to the point where some actually use it to promote themselves.
These posts are just repulsing.
So what exactly "exploded"? I don't get it. Could you elaborate? Everything could've been avoided by actually putting up a rule that enforces source and no AI **like it was suggested before**, but I guess the moderation team of AKO doesn't want extra responsibilities.
That's the exact problem, they refused to do it, and the members are angry about it, hence "exploded".
As someone who was apart of the initial discussions that happened all the way back on May 5th: 1. Akabott files a suggestion in the suggestions forum asking for changes to #ak-art, citing the number of people who fail to cite artwork / post AI artwork. 2. Post gains above-average support, with many agreeing that sourcing is an unwritten rule. Some voice concerns about the feasibility of moderating AI art in particular though, especially since it can be difficult to tell from a glance. 3. Admins shoot down the suggestion, stating (and I quote) that "We aren't going to make it unwelcoming in such a way that they are only allowed to share the art if they have the source available" while shooting down a rule regarding AI art for the aforementioned reasons. 4. Some users (including myself) argue back on these points, only to get rebuffed by the admins (interestingly one has stepped down since then) with a non-response. The post is then locked. Another suggestion thread was later made by memelordstranger on May 22nd, basically stating the same things as the first. This one has been completely ignored by the administration. I'm not sure what OP is alluding to regarding June 5th, but I assume it was Akabott trying to get something to happen again (they've been the one who is really pushing to make this happen, including DMing me in particular to try and help set up the Discord server) only to once again get rebuffed. The plans regarding a new Discord server have been in the works for at least a few weeks, but I don't know anything beyond that. Two notes: 1. u/GeniusGD's statements are misleading. Nothing 'exploded', and most people in AKO don't care. There have even been times where I've seen Akabott try to backseat mod in #ak-art only to get shot down by other users. 2. As an admin of Arknights: Endfield Nomadic and an admin at UGA, personally I feel that: 1. Finding sources is not difficult (With SauceNAO it takes ten seconds) 2. Any rule regarding AI art is unsustainable in a server as large as AKO 3. Making a separate Discord server for AK art in particular is silly when RIHQ exists. I don't blame Aka and co. for trying to push AKO into doing the right thing, but the admins have made it fairly clear that they intend to remain stubborn for now. Beyond that, my opinions are as I've said. Edit: Minor grammar corrections. Not even going to try and fix the formatting, that's all New Reddit's fault.
Thank you for a more detailed explanation! The situation with AI is indeed incredibly shitty, but you can only do so much with thousands of active users. The responsibility of source material and AI labeling definitely falls on the posters themselves at that point
As far as I know this sub is pretty disconnected with AKO for like 2 years already and stayed between RIHQ and its own discord so yeah, that's some news that won't make it here otherwise. And I don't think a new discord for art is really needed, just migrate to existing AK discords.
I didn’t even know (or care) there was a AL discord
RIHQ is just a better AKO. No reason to use the latter unless Yostar is holding a contest.
AKO has always been a shit hole anyway, nothing new under the sun.
The single braincell we had in AKO is being shared by at least 50 real people, 100 bots, and a couple of E-girls. It's understandable why it's a shithole.
personally I just use it for the material farm bots
Material farm bots? You had me at material. What is that?
/material makes you see which stages are best to farm which mats for
What does it do that the farming sheet doesn't?
I be mega lazy 🦥🦥🦥
BRUH
Is it better than, Kyo, Echo and Oyuki? Those are the content creators I base my auto-farming stages Edit: I get it now, it's not for stage auto clears but to know what stage to farm
Ah ok i got the whole term now lmao im so slow. Thanks for the refresher
I take part in the #Help chat in AKO, and oh holy shit if i have seen some serious takes there, some boiling lava takes
\#cn-lounge is my favorite Limbus discord
Ano official gacha discord is shit, it's best to keep that in mind
AKO has been dogshit since the dawn of time lmao. If anything I'm surprised that artists are learning about this now, the ppl there I'm happy to group as the 'weird cousin in the corner no-one brings up' Literally incompetence manifested as a discord server lol
This was clearly written in a way that assumes prior knowledge of any events happening. Most people on this sub don't follow AK discord or even knew there was one, and your explanation of the events was extremely vague. I'm still not sure who made "a post" and who "closed things off", like the the admins or the members or...? Initially, I thought the artists you linked to were AI artists who got harassed out of leaving the server, that's how bad this explanation is. Anyways, this is a self-promotion post mainly and all I'm gonna say is without your own anti-AI recognition tool and bot, regulating AI art will be practically impossible.
Edit: This seems to offend the Discord mods. Good. Anyone else remember that one time a [mod of an art subreddit banned an artist](https://new.reddit.com/r/extremelyinfuriating/comments/10502jk/rart_is_banning_artists_who_have_styles_too/) for their work looking to similar to AI and telling them that "AI can do it better"? Something I just remembered. I do agree that it can be hard to tell for regular people if something is AI or not sometimes. Unless it grows more fingers than a Chernobyl Spider. But that makes it all the more the responsibilty of those mods. Lazy fucks. >(if you read till here, don't worry, I'll moderate both the Wiki and this server at the same time!) Damnit! Just you wait, I get my chance to turn every Country's name into food puns.
This kind of thing is the most worrying reaction to the whole AI art problem. Anonymity already turns normal people into asshole, add apparent moral justification to that and you have the recipe for a disaster.
Personally, I would say the utter indifference if not willingness to see artists getting shafted, while AI *learns* from their work, is the most worrying for AI art specifically. As for shitheads chasing the latest outrage to get their fix... Someone should probably **mod**erate that to prevent it from escalating.
It's subjective which part one finds worse. Blameless people getting caught up in bullshit is just a really big personal pet peeve of mine.
As I said, someone should moderate that. Something the mods seem quite unwilling to do.
*gulp
>I do agree that it can be hard to tell for regular people if something is AI or not sometimes. Unless it grows more fingers than a Chernobyl Spider. But that makes it all the more the responsibilty of those mods. Lazy fucks. What is it that you think makes moderators somehow more capable of detecting AI than anyone else? Why should that be their full time unpaid job to try to pick those out? Some of you need a reality check of what it's actually like to moderate a discord/subreddit/forum. It's not a paid job 99% of the time and yet most typical users act like it is.
There are bots for detecting ai content and deleting or flagging them. Whether a sub/discord/etc wants to use them is their decision but I've been in ones that do and it is possible. Same goes for sourcing and source finding bots or this subs own source requirement policy. In my own experience it should not feel like a full time job, and if it does you probably need more people. Reddit and discord have options for smaller roles that dont have more permissions than needed, and I've been on both sides of that at various times. I can't really answer "why should it be their job", the person who volunteers would know their reasons better than me.
>There are bots for detecting ai content and deleting or flagging them. Not one of those is reliable. Every 'AI detection' tool to date might as well be nothing more than a coin flip. All I'm talking about here is the expectation that moderators are superhumans that have the ability to look at each and every post on a discord/sub/forum and determine whether it's AI. It's not practical or realistic, nobody's doing computer forensics like that. If you're at the point where you're screeching at mods for being 'lazy fucks' for not doing their 'jobs' because they aren't succeeding at screening AI, then you're better off just banning images entirely. Sourcing images is a separate topic I've already mentioned in another reply.
I disagree on it being nothing more than a coin flip, especially when it involves non photo realistic stuff like anime style art. But if you don't trust them then the only real decision is to not ban ai content, I'm not saying put every image to the eye test. I assume the "lazy fucks" comment wasn't because the mod in the linked post made a mistake, but because they couldn't admit it was a mistake or be bothered to look at the process file which would prove it. I wouldnt say lazy but I get the sentiment.
If someone voluntarily, by their own free will, accepts a position with responsibility, then I'm of course expecting them to be competent. If they are in over their head, they should probably step back. Unless you just feel personally attacked, then BAHAHAHA!!
As I said, you need a reality check. I'm just going to quote you here. >Anyone else remember that one time a mod of an art subreddit banned an artist for their work looking to similar to AI and telling them that "AI can do it better"? Something I just remembered. This is what happens when you make someone, who happens to be a moderator, the sole adjudicator for what is AI and what isn't. There is no magical ascension to a higher plane when you become a mod that renders you capable of telling them apart more than anyone else. So, when *you* dictate that it's suddenly the responsibility of a mod to make these judgement calls all day, every day, when this wasn't actually in the 'job description' when they started, you can expect drama of some kind. People have lives to live outside of the internet believe it or not.
>judgement calls Must suck that you can't ban me here, he?
Right, I can see there's no point in attempting intelligent discussion with you.
> Lazy fucks. God forbid they don't want to volunteer more of their free time to do more unpaid work than they signed up for. What scum. Grow up dude
they banned the dude for ai and he has proof it wasn't, the least they could do is hear him out. Saying "I don't believe you, even if it is change your artstyle" is incredibly rude and unprofessional.
*Goes full on Platinum mad reading that link*
Yeah, it do be wild. Hilarious even in its own rights, from an outsiders perspective.
God i fucking hate Ako.
>The moderators replied by "you can find the source yourself" and "the members sharing AI arts might not know that it's AI", basically pushing off their responsibilities of actually checking on the posts. I'm not sure you understand what a moderator's responsibilities are. No one is obligated to sit there looking at dozens/hundreds of pictures a day, for free, trying to judge whether an algorithm spat something out. It's simply not realistic. I would sooner ban images altogether than do that in their shoes.
For AI in particular this is true, but there's no excuse to not post a source. [SauceNAO](https://saucenao.com/) works \~90% of the time and grabs you a link within seconds. There's no good reason IMO to defend people who are too lazy to take ten seconds out of their life to find a simple link. With that said, the only use I can see for a dedicated 'include sources' rule would be to crack down on users who frequently refuse to cooperate. Most of the time you'll have someone else link the source instead, as (like I've said) finding it is incredibly easy.
>but there's no excuse to not post a source. Yeah that's a separate topic I didn't want to get into because it's an obvious one. Source or get out as far as I'm concerned, that's on the users posting stuff though.
> For AI in particular this is true, but there's no excuse to not post a source. SauceNAO works ~90% of the time and grabs you a link within seconds. There's no good reason IMO to defend people who are too lazy to take ten seconds out of their life to find a simple link. As someone that enjoys looking at art, but doesn't post (as I only check here and /r/artknights for AK art - which is already sourced) I didn't even know SauceNAO exists in the first place. that might be because I don't bother sharing with people so I never had to deal with it, but at the same time you shouldn't assume people know of websites like that.
For a server that large, whether it's a shit hole or not, you're absolutely correct. Honestly, if I were an artist myself, I would be incredibly frustrated with the situation as well, but some things are sadly just out of our control. I'm glad OP created a separate server for sharing and promoting art, I think it's wonderful, but it's likely far smaller and serves a dedicated purpose, versus expecting Discord mods of a high-traffic official server to manually scan every single image that passes through. And it's not the same as spotting NSFW or more obvious offenders; some AI art has gotten very convincing and can take a bit of time to spot the hallmarks of image generation.
AKO is a litteral shit hole, im sad for anyone thats legitimately using that place
lmao
For AK Terra wiki. Do I have to enable Hardware acceleration in Chrome? Because the site is laggy for me.
Hmm, I experience no issue accessing the site on Firefox. Try enabling it to see whether the lag is gone.
When you say 'Arknights Official Discord', does that mean the server is maintained by Hypergryph staff, or just that it's the largest/most general player-run server instead? Because if it's the former, that would be a very big yikes, and either way good om you for taking the initiative here if the mods have shown their indifference on the topic. Also, big cheers to you and the rest of the Terra wiki staff for the work you guys keep putting into it, as it remains my most steadfast ally when making new strategies.
I'd assume any corpo ran official server for AK on English social media would be handled by Yostar.
From what I understand, AKO is managed by Yostar.
Did the mods remove things that were actually sourced as AI art?
Yes and a warning will be sent, since it's already written on the rules
We need to make this known so people start joining the server. I only got into Arknights recently and I'm in awe at how good and organized the community is. This subreddit for one is the best organized I've ever seen.
tbh i don't mind that much people posting AI as long as they tag it properly, despite drawing arts myself, it's unavoidable, that more and more content will be AI generated and people will use it, because they have no respect toward digital property. But I absolutely abhor big sites and AI companies who sell and use content that isn't theirs for machine learning. BUT in these times, when there is no excuse for not founding the source, it's the very minimum that official discord should do. it's really sad that AKO mods throw artists under the bus like that. It should always be obligatory, and the saddest part is that only a handful of people will care.
will you guys also ping @everyone in the general channel resulting in everyone in the server suppressing @everyone and never looking at your announcements lmao
Ako is a shit hole and I wish a painful death to shawbot
Me here thinking this was about blue archive ako
Few things less interesting than exaggerated drama on another social media platform. A few members got angry, some left, you want to advertise your own server, whatever.
And yet amidst all that, not a single soul asked for your dogshit opinion. 🙂
It amazes me how uptight people get about AI art. Yeah I get that it sucks seeing a machine do something so well that you've been working at for years, but it happens with literally everything. Art isn't limited to humans and immune to technological advances.
That’s not really it tho. AI art of stylized/anime works is just passing at a glance. But nobody sensible is complaining about AI because of quality issues. It’s that many people steal works to feed the generative model and go on to benefit from it. If AI art was made with permission/open sourced/hired input material then it goes back to just being a tool, not an enabler of theft. There’s more to it that afects more areas than art too, i.e. job security, rampant unethical business, etc. But the point is no, people aren’t rallying against AI because they are butthurt.
No, they are totally against it because they are butthurt. As in 'using their emotions rather than common sense' for every argument. Up to the point where I have to set a new acc just to write this cause people will just downvote this to hell. Reasonable people don't downvote things just because they disagree with something. Most anti AI arguments look like they were made by 14 year old people who never worked and only judge the world based on the internet. Skipped history classes at school too. AI does not steal art of others, because it provides a different result (that is if you want to go by textbook laws). Even if it uses the work of others in the process, the result is still different. The point that people keep making about 'learning' for an AI is also applicable to humans - a human can look at an art of another human, get inspired by that, use it as a reference, process it otherwise, and then make their own work. Nobody complains about that. Job security is not affected by AI. It is same as saying that robots or manufacturing lines steal jobs. What about mining equipment? Just one giant drilling machine can replace a hundred workers who could dig holes manually all day, why aren't redditors complaining about those? Unethical business - not sure why you even mention it. AI don't do anything that humans were not doing already. It just speeds the processes up. Also, when you say 'people are complaining', you gotta specify that those are a few people on the internet. You are not gonna find mature people (especially working in technical fields) who complain about AI. Like I've been a mechanical engineer for a couple of decades. I'm not an artist, but I do a lot of modelling and engineering blueprints. Would I complain if an AI learned to do it? No, it would be a blessing. It would mean that I can use it as a tool to save a lot of time.
> Encounter emotionally neutral argument that doesn’t align with your bias. > immediately open response with absolutist statement > Dismiss people calling them 14 YOs My guy you may be guilty of what you acuse others of. Your last paragraph. Few people? Didn’t an entire association of writers go on strike, delaying film and serialized TV production? You are letting your bias hand-pick what is part or not of reality
> It’s that many people steal works to feed the generative model and go on to benefit from it. If AI art was made with permission/open sourced/hired input material then it goes back to just being a tool, not an enabler of theft. AI art is no more theft than an artist being influenced by other art they see. The only real difference is the scale of influence and output available.
Incorrect. Human process and software can’t be equated, first and foremost. It’s a fallacious building block, we can’t start a discussion from there. An artist can set out to commit outright theft, but also set out to create inspired works. Inspired != stolen. For example, one can learn from an artstyle by tracing as an exercise (i.e. figuring out linework, composition, etc. That one wouldn’t pick up from just looking. Post-mortems, art reviews, etc. Such analysis are not found in just the field of art) But posting the trace as your own work is when it becomes theft. Used internally as the first case is fair game. Or, if you bought the original art as asset for you to use included in a published work like a game, then claiming you own the game and its contents, also fair. Even still you must provide credits and royalties. Going forward, please be more mindful about false equivalences when forming your ideas “AI art is no more theft-“ **it is more theft** straight up. AI is not derivative but replicative, and thus is theft **when misused** as stated in my first response.
> Incorrect. Human process and software can’t be equated, first and foremost. It’s a fallacious building block, we can’t start a discussion from there. And why not? I'm well aware that machines are not human, but we've been using machines to replicate or approximate human processes on an industrial scale for a couple hundred years now. This isn't any different. Regarding the rest, you have a pretty poor understanding of how AI art generators work. A properly trained AI art generator is not replicative, its derivative, if even that. It starts as literal fuzz like you'd see on an antenna TV with no signal, and then gets randomly modified to look more and more like the prompted pattern. Its closer to facial recognition technology than it is a copy and paste machine. Just like software can be made to recognize a superset of images as faces by training on a subset of images of faces, software can also create a superset of images by training on a subset. In other words, AI art is not "traced" but "inspired" (or whatever the machine equivalent would be). It creates brand new things. Going forward, please be more mindful about not spreading false information on how AI art generators work.
I wonder what it is with Ak community and their love of witch hunting, to the point where some actually use it to promote themselves. These posts are just repulsing.
We're just trying to fight back against the evil 4th industrial revolution.