masklayer

UAhh I'm gonna be sick ! OH

uhhhhhhhhh

Tom | 31 | 🦌🌐

<3 @clip <3

Β 


Β 

Tags I use sometimes:
Camera β€’ Photo β€’ Timelapse β€’ Video
VRChat β€’ Cybuck β€’ Clip
Life β€’ Art β€’ Making β€’ (?)
Creature

Β 


Β 

"mweeh.."

Β 


Β 
opinions my own & do not reflect those of my employer ;3


Loosf
@Loosf

saw this

an author that was defending AI generation, and basically reducing all furry is to just an aesthetic, something frivolous.
I was chatting about her yesterday as well.

Condensing some of the thoughts.

"ai art and furry literature are functionally the same, I am very smart"
"it is a frivolous space, unserious, no need to bother myself overmuch, easily obsoleted"

she is writing in furry spaces but absolutely dismissive of the human element in it
like, absolutely seeming to completely misunderstand how furry is

well

so much about personal expression no?

like
seems to treat it as just
an aesthetic rather than
an avenue of personal expression and exploration?

"If someone could write my work with chatgpt better, I would read it"
That thought is alien.

there is nothing inherently wrong about SOMEONE's entire engagement with furry to just be aesthetic

It is dismissing everyone else who is not engaging solely like that where it gets to be a problem

and why dismissing graphic artists like that is so insulting

and then today with the defense of AI stuff
Luis, [14/12/2023 09:47 a. m.]
Like
seriously, that is just absolutely fucking infantilizing to autistic people and extremely anthropomorphizing to the sparkling autocorrects.

It just fucking
restates the "autistic people p zombie" bullshit

"AI is autism personified"

fuck that

Like I can see a weird line going there
"Autistic people feel seen and represented with media depictions of aliens and or robots", which are OFTEN portrayed with more sympathy and empathy than explicitly autistic human characters

but then also fully anthropomorphizing the sparkling autocorrect and plagiarism engines. Statistical models.

Which in this comparison reduces autistic people to
chinese rooms

"It is autism personified"

oh gee, thanks, dehumanizing autistic people, just what the doctor ordered


chasejxyz
@chasejxyz

Lowd isn't just "some writer."

She's the EIC of Zooscape, which is the fandom's ONLY pro-paying market. It's one of the few markets that pays anything more than a token payment, and it gets submissions from some very high-tier writers because of the pay.

Well, it used to. The fact that she pairs every story with an AI-generated piece of "art" and she now "doesn't discriminate" between AI-generated and human-written works means a ton of writers just. Don't want to put up with that shit anymore.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @Loosf's post:

in addition to being cataclysmically wrong in the most annoying possible way, she also doesn't seem to know what generative "AI" broadly and LLMs even are. maybe she's taking the classic hypeman position of arguing about a hypothetical future product, but I am not sure I even agree that "future neural networks, trained on huge amounts of whatever their creators could scrape off the internet, if heavily prompted, will be able to produce a coherent story or script worth reading". like, have you seen an "AI" story? article? literally anything? it's boring! I'm unconvinced the machine tendency to make only the most average linguistic or narrative choice, and to immediately resolve any conflict it's prompted to introduce in the most boring way possible, can be trained out of AI. "making the most uninteresting, average choice possible" is what these machines are for.

in fact the argument could be made that the first generation of these, trained on only human-produced art and writing, will be the best, because future LLMs trained on "the internet" will have machine-generated slop built into their architecture. this grey extruded art-like content product can only get worse.

AND LIKE

there is already the issue of BEING TRAINED ON THEIR OWN OUTPUT, leading to shit! That is an issue!

Like, remember that "ai seinfeld" shit? People flocked to it, thinking it was parodic

but it was earnest. The creators of it were actually convinced they were making the future of "content"
not art. Not television. Not media.
"Content"

Extruded, homogeneous
"Infinitely customizable" but also completely fucking vapid

in reply to @chasejxyz's post: