the_jennifer•2d agoTop Commenter

The debate over AI art generators is missing one big detail

I keep seeing people argue that AI art is either totally creative or just theft. But I noticed last week that a tool like Midjourney can't even draw consistent hands after 3 years of updates. Are we arguing about the wrong thing entirely? What do you think is the real issue here?

3 comments

3 Comments

hollyl252d ago

did you catch that article about the guy who spent 800 hours generating AI images and still couldn't get a simple profile without weird melting skin? i think that nails the real issue better than the copyright debate. these programs are basically really advanced guesswork machines. they don't know what a hand is or why it should have five fingers, they just know that most pictures have something flesh colored in that general area. calling it art is like calling a microwave a chef because it can heat up a pizza. the tech is impressive in its own way, but we're giving it way too much credit for something that's mostly trial and error with a side of stolen training data.

mia7002d ago

800 hours to still get melting hands sounds about right for something that thinks fingers are just suggestions.

angela_harris2d ago

The hand thing actually made me reconsider my whole stance too. I used to think AI art was mostly harmless until I tried to generate a portrait for a D&D character and it gave me a six-fingered nightmare. It made me realize that these tools are really just pattern matching on steroids, not actually understanding what they're making. The real issue is that we're calling it "art" when its more like advanced collage without the credit.