• he/him

I occasionally write long posts but you should assume I'm talking out of my ass until proved otherwise. I do like writing shit sometimes. Ā 

Ā 

50/50 chance of suit pictures end up here or on the Art Directory account. Good luck.

Ā 

Be 18+ or be gone you kids act fuckin' weird.

Ā 

pfp by wackyanimal


Ā 

I tag all of my posts complaining about stuff #complaining, feel free to muffle that if you'd like a more positive cohost experience.

Ā 


Ā 
Art and suit stuff: @PlumPanAD

Ā 


Ā 
"DMs":
Feel free to message as long as you have something to talk about!


erica
@erica

Heads up that this will be a certain amount of inside baseball and also this is me just like... stating opinions and observations I'm not writing a dissertation here so don't go in expecting that. šŸ‘

A lot of mutuals/peers/other artists are jumping onto Cara now that it's... open? Has an app? Not entirely sure. The doors are fully open, at least, and if you follow any concept/prod artist you've likely seen them post their handle. EDIT: This push largely comes as a response to Instagram's recent policy change that any content uploaded to it will be fed wholesale into training for Meta's AI stuff, with artists seeking a new place to post art.

It's meant to be a replacement for ArtStation, an art portfolio site that famously pissed off its entire userbase when it announced it would start its own NFT system (which it cancelled) and would allow AI art to be posted on the site (which it now hides by default).

I never really gelled with the idea of replacing ArtStation with a thing that is functionally ArtStation again because I think the problems with AS are sort of inherent to that style of site and the industry it speaks to. AS quickly became unusable to me long before its downfall because it doubles as a clout-and-trend chasing platform where original and interesting art, artists, and ideas are buried under the weight of aspiration to the AAA meat grinder or porcelain-like women in armor. The site, dominated by Industry Art (see: Disney, Sony, Warner Bros, Marvel, WOTC, etc.), would unsurprisingly kneel to broader forces in tech because most of those artists also exist in one broad demographic of "guys who don't really like leaving the comfy seat".


About the Site

Anyway, the promise of Cara is that it is a 'social media' site for artists that is anti-generative AI (it's not, see: later). Its explore tab is like ArtStation but the site's primary function is a feed (which defaults to a For You tab, of course)

I'm not really sure why the site is trying to be more than just a portfolio site because the end result, being an industry/discipline-focused platform, is that the vibes are sort of like LinkedIn where everyone is Networking-Friendly? Which, I don't know. Very personal distinction here but I dislike that atmosphere. I don't want to feel like I'm at the world's most milquetoast industry mixer 24/7.

What's actually poison to me is to have a 'feed' or numbers or metrics at all. It's insanethat you would look at the most heinous features of modern social media, the gamification of engagement via publicly-accessible metrics, and think "let's do that" for a site wholly dedicated to art. I've watched that decimate the creativity, drive, and variety of artists over the course of the last decade. To shoehorn it into your replacement for the biggest art platform currently around... It says a lot about the people running the site. Which,

About its Stance

Cara is a social media and portfolio platform for artists.

With the widespread use of generative AI, we decided to build a place that filters out generative AI images so that people who want to find authentic creatives and artwork can do so easily.

Many platforms currently accept AI art when it’s not ethical, while others have promised ā€œno AI foreverā€ policies without consideration for the scenario where adoption of such technologies may happen at the workplace in the coming years.

The future of creative industries requires nuanced understanding and support to help artists and companies connect and work together. We want to bridge the gap and build a platform that we would enjoy using as creatives ourselves.

Our stance on AI:

  • We do not agree with generative AI tools in their current unethical form, and we won’t host AI-generated portfolios unless the rampant ethical and data privacy issues around datasets are resolved via regulation.
  • In the event that legislation is passed to clearly protect artists, we believe that AI-generated content should always be clearly labeled, because the public should always be able to search for human-made art and media easily.

To me this sort of says it all but,

We believe that the future of creative industries will involve heavy use of AI, and it’s paramount that our governments work to regulate the rampant unethical data usage as well as provide safety nets for the impact AI will have on our society.

If generative AI becomes a fixture in production across industries, the way we create and consume art will change significantly, and it will impact all of us.
The Cara team will continue to place ourselves at the forefront and stay up to date on technology and industry developments. We will work to support human creatives the best way we can, and hope that Cara can be a place where artists can find discussions, education, and support as we navigate this incoming shift together.

Their stance is pretty clear. They're not anti-generative art, they're anti-unethical generative art. Which, to me, is a coward's way of saying you actually are pro-AI art, you just don't like it when it is trained on or used to replicate your art specifically. To be anti-generative art is to be anti-capitalist because they are one and the same. It is a product built on the labor of others to undercut and obliterate any earning power they made for themselves. There is no "ethical" here because its core function, to train on data, requires a staggering amount of material that is impossible to source ethically under the strictest definition of it.

Is it trained on existing models? Then it's 100% unethical, as that is all stolen data.
Is it trained on new models? Where does that data come from? Was that data given with full and informed consent? Or was it pulled from sites and platforms that rewrote its terms of service/cut a deal to offer all its user data. If it was, was every user meaningfully informed of this decision and given a course of action or was it told to them in a Terms Update email to which they have no say? If an option was given to them to opt-out, was it by default? Or were they opted-into it, against their wishes, and forced to manually change it ensuring that users who no longer access the site/have passed away have their data used without their knowledge.

Moreover, how far does this extend to? If the artwork itself is ethical but the project uses unethical data, is that wholly trashed? If the artwork is concept art for a project where the lead used Midjourney to mockup some """sketches""" to show the concept artist, is that ethical?

How much can you trust a "This Has AI Elements" toggle if the user is flagging it and they have no reason not to lie if it benefits them on your platform that is built to have visibility metrics associated to it.

About Capitalism

The definition of "ethical" here only extends as far as the site operators want it to because ethics are subjective and even if we see eye-to-eye on this our ethics on a billion different topics probably vary. There is no objective case here, nor am I arguing for that to be clear. My apprehension is with entertaining the idea at all. If you believe in a future where this exists, you believe in a future where corporations like Disney, Amazon, Netflix, etc still have a say in how we do what we do and, more importantly, value what we do. Ethical or not, the goal of generative art is not to "help" or "assist" me, it is to cut parts of me out of the process. It is to make the steps of creation as efficient a machine as possible.

I am not here to entertain a future where any of these entities have a say in this. They do not want what I want, which is to earn a reasonable living. They want profit and they want growth, which means getting more out of us and giving less in return, eternally. "There is no ethical consumption under capitalism" is very fucking literal here and it is not a magic key to conveniently set aside your morals. It is a concise set of words meant to inform and radicalize you to the reality that there is an underlying poison you must work towards eradicating. You do not have permission to toss your morals under the bus with a shibboleth, you have a duty as a human being to work towards the collective betterment of society through action and empathy.

The sites and platforms you use for entertainment, hobbyist, or professional purposes are all built and governed with a set of ethics and values in mind. They were made by people with a vision informed by the reality around them and how they perceive themselves in it. It's why Cohost is limited in the the way it is, it's why Facebook is as toxic as it is, it's why Bluesky is as insufferable as it is--these places do not exist in a vacuum and are not immaculately conceived. They are the product of people with a vision, and Cara is no different.

And, to me, that vision is one of some industry professionals who saw their portfolio site become the villain of the day and chose to create an alternative without pissing off the reigning authorities that sign paychecks. It created not a site for artists, but for a subset of professional/aspiring-to-be-professional artists.

Cara states that it pushes for legislation on AI art and data collection which... you know, broadly speaking, is a noble goal. The problem is that I have no faith in its authority on this matter because I know, I know, that when it comes to legislation and the protection of copyright on digital works, that corporations and I do not sit on the same side. I can't exactly see the future but I can definitely see the past and what I have seen gives me faith in numbers so pejoratively negative that we're in some scientific notation kinda territory. So seeing that, and seeing a site that tries to tow the line between me and them, well. I don't know, man.

I am not immune to the idea that life fucking sucks and shit is fucking hard and earning a living doing this is impossible enough as it is. I do not to be lectured on it, I live it every single day. But the degree to which some peers are just not willing to examine, even in the slightest, the platforms they engage with is sort of alarming. We all pull out of this together and it starts with at least asking a question.

If you need a portfolio site, you could probably do worse but you can do a lot better. Use a blog, use Carrd, make something simple, and fight every single day not to bandage the problem but to eliminate the root cause.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @erica's post:

I really don't like the AI stances that are all about figuring out the best way to surrender to the proponents of its usage while the pushback is still strong and ongoing, so having a new platform include that in their messaging really sucks.

This is a really good analysis. I was also bothered about their wishy washy stance on AI and the professional artist ArtStation 2.0 vibe they're targeting is really not for me, but I made an account anyway because I'm rooting for anything that is taking people away from Twitter/IG and that is not Bluesky.

The part that confused me about that stance tho is how much they're promoting themselves as anti-AI, going as far as having their own Glaze tool. It would be really easy to not go one way or another, but that stance really betrays their specific vision for the future

some of my favorite artists on twitter (RIP) had very loose drawing styles. i followed artists who would draw their OCs like its portfolio-ready LoL splash art, but they werent my favorite artists, you know? may favorites were the artists who go feral for whatever their hyper-fixation is, and thats not the kind of art that sites like artstation or now cara is built to cater towards.

honestly, the death of twitter—by which i mean it redirects to x and i literally cannot load x as a site—sucks because twitter is the only place where those artists "live". as much as i'd want them on cohost, i'd settle for seeing them again on bluesky (can artists in china even access bluesky? id imagine so if they were on twitter...). i could spend an hour on twitter scrolling down and just looking at all the cool art from all the cool artists i followed. on bluesky i scroll for 2 minutes and im already to stuff posted 3 days ago. i suspect using cara would be much the same as bluesky in terms of my time spent on the site.

The initial timeline-curation-curve of BlueSky is rough. I've managed to get a timeline that's lively and takes me a solid while to catch up on, but it took a lot of skimming who the people I follow follow, and digging through user-made feeds related to what I like. Which is cool and all, but it's a lot of work, and the site does close to nothing to guide people through this.

This is a really good read, thanks for linking!

They're definitely different things and it's why I really struggle to see why this site has so much Instagram-like function. Artists do want a community but that can also be too broad a definition. Do they want community to network, to socialize, to learn, to hire/promote? It can't be all of them because some are inherently toxic to others and you then fragment your userbase so severely that you either get in-fighting or one side wins and it becomes impenetrably exclusionary.

I don't have the answers but I've been through the shit enough to know whatever they're chasing is somewhat useless, and I was just urged to write something about it because I'm sorta tired of seeing my peers jump ship to the Next New Thing every time without even thinking in the short term.

This is a good read , and provides a lot to think about.
Thinking about ways artists can create their own spaces while still being able to advertise their work in the larger online platforms now šŸ¤”.

Great read! I feel very similar, I saw a lot of people jumping to it and I was just like this is just going to be another "This site is so good for artists!" And then everyone just moves back to twitter in a week. I think having a newer portfolio type site is good,,,,,, but also I'm of the opinion in the modern art landscape you're better off making your own portfolio site that way you can curate it on your own and not worry if your art "fits in" to the site.

"This push largely comes as a response to Instagram's recent policy change that any content uploaded to it will be fed wholesale into training for Meta's AI stuff, with artists seeking a new place to post art."
Man Zuck's been making it real easy to never want to go back. Quite glad I never did insta, I bailed on Facebook entirely after 2018.

But yeah the fight for ethical social and user content platforms is nightmarish.

Blogger is still around but viewership is very low (referring to my sfw stuff). I'm using carrd for my sfw professional portfolio, but I wish there's more ways to layout pages better. I hate wix with a firey passion fucking laggy shit. Might check out neocities after figuring out how to do html/css.

This is an excellent writeup and echoes a lot of my sentiment. I also don't need the same 5 industry artists harping on about things I can't relate to like they've been doing these past 4 years... (speaking on behalf of the art community, but leaving a large part of us out of their narrative)

If cara is supposed to be like artstation like they've been touting it, it's a calling card for a very specific subset of industry artists.

I personally have nothing to gain by being on there. Everyone else will be fighting over the same scraps they did on those other platforms. And when the numbers they insist on having as metrics don't scale, if the site can't sustain or bring in their usual clients, they'll be back on Instagram.

Maybe I'm burnt out from all this AI talk. Maybe I'm being cynical; I sincerely hope something works out. But I think they missed me on this one.