Ethical Art AI

The person draws something on computer, uploads picture to the auction house to earn money. After upload computer shows list of people that have similar style of the drawing. All money from your drawing will go to those people.
That's youtube.

Someday I want to commission an artist for some game assets or an album cover, I just haven't made anything good enough yet

Holy fuck I just realized I can comission wallpapers 😃
Whether I can afford it is a different matter entirely

turns on phone
goes to the clock app to set an alarm so I can wake up in the morning
phone sends a push notification of names and contact numbers
"Siri what is this?"
"It's a list of knocker ups you can hire to wake you up and are looking for new clients"
Knocker ups' comment on this story: "This is a horror story to a techbro and a feel-good comedy to anyone with a sense of human decency"
( from reddit )
- In all seriousness though, I wouldn't pay money to look at pretty pictures. If I wanted an image but AI didn't exist, I wouldn't commission anyone. The image that I want just simply wouldn't exist.
  
  What's the point of you posting that analogy? What's the point of your current comment?

As somebody who commissions art this would fucking rule, actually.

Imagine if computers did this with math. Same thing.
The problem isn't that computers do work for us. The problem is that we're violently coerced into serving capital or starving to death at best.
- The effort and ingenuity put in to make computers do maths correctly and helpfully is incredible and immense; the way people use computers in original ways to solve incredibly complicated problems is and should be applauded, but the computer also just does exactly what it was told. Given infinite patience and concentration the computer is unnecessary.\
  AI art uses already existing art and can't create something original or new. Setting aside the ethics of generators taking credit for work done by others (which is still unethical even outside a capitalist society), it just doesn't create anything interesting or worthwhile because almost definitionally something better already exists.\
  Also to counter another argument I have heard before that human artists are 'trained' on other people's art too and often don't credit them. Humans also have innumerable experiences in their life that contribute to everything they think and do which, as chaotic systems go, is pretty good at finding a new path not taken.
  
  Strongly disagree on the "AI art uses already existing art and can’t create something original or new" part. Are collages new? Is new music new if it uses pre-existing chords? Is parody new?
  Unless you think AI just copies/pastes existing art like Google image search (it doesn't), the things that AI creates is new.
- Math, fot the most part, isn't a reflection of human psyche valued for the human connection and a shared soul.
  It can be in a lot of places, but usually isn't.

Ok but this is also an Ai that I would pay a 10 dollar subscription towards just to not have to hunt down what artists are taking commissions and managing prices and everything within the freelance space. I know it will never happen but God it would be nice not spending 10 hours finding an artist I like who isn't wait listing forever.
- the basic problem is to have all artists who are available for commissioning announce it in one place and in a consistent way.
  so it's impossible.
  
  Wouldnt asking people to submit artists they know and to track those work if there are enough people?
  
  well, that is honestly a good use of AI scraping, to find disparate promotions and combine them
- Looks like we found a potential use for AI that is not only ethical, but actually useful to.
- Honestly Im willing to bet you could do something like this right now. I'm going to ask chat gpt for something similar.
  The only downside is that I think SEO will matter even more when going through an AI which is already a bane on online artists.
  
  Why would you use a whole ass LLM for this when a search engine from 2002 could do the job?

art commissioning has always been interesting to me, because i don't understand it. like, not from the artist's perspective obviously, they want to get paid.
personally, i've never thought "i would like some art". i can appreciate and critique art, and i can compare works to give preference to one over another. but i've never been able to describe a nonexistent piece that i do want.
but people have obviously been doing this for hundreds of years. so... am i broken?
- It's quite common with tattoos, right? Unless you're getting flash or "omakase" tattoos, you can describe a concept to the artist and they'll design something for you.
  
  maybe? i don't really understand why you would want a tattoo either.
- Others have mentioned gifts and roleplaying games, but also businesses need art. Clip art, logos, decorative stuff. There’s always something delightful about finding small stores that do window murals, or novelty gas stations, or just stores that take some extra considerations for aesthetic.
  Eg - part of Buccee’s is that beaver logo. It would not be the same at all without that logo and the beaver statues.
  
  corpo art is another deal though. nobody wants it, it's just required.
- I usually make my own art, but I did commission a unique piece as an anniversary gift once. It was in a style that I can't replicate, featured my and my partner's silhouettes, and was created by a friend.
  Otherwise, I don't care much for decorations that aren't practical. I'm more of a "useful clutter" type than a "useless decor" type. Ever since I was a kid, I was confused by the concept of playful-looking decorations that you can't play with, like those silver ball things that my grandma decorated her garden with (what do you mean, "I'm not allowed to throw them"?) That feeling never went away. So as an adult, most "decorations" I own today have other uses, including various "stim toys" that I encourage guests to pick up and play with.
  
  I am the exact same way. Growing up, whenever I would see some sculpture, or something like that, I would always ask "What does it do?". Then I would be told it's art and I'd go "Yes, but what does it DO?!". If there was no answer beyond just sit there to be looked at, I was instantly uninterested. What do you mean it doesn't do anything? Someone spent a lot of time making this and you're telling me it doesn't even move, or make noise, or anything? You can't even climb on it, play with it, or touch it? What's the point?
- I was in a similar boat until I found some uncommon style I liked. I still haven't commissioned anyone yet, but that's mostly because I can't seem to find any agreed upon terminology for all but the most mainstream of art styles, let alone anyone that is consistently good
- Try playing D&D, and you'll want to commission art.
  
  i've done that for years.

This is something I'd love to see, I've generated some things I'd like to find real artists that do similar stuff so I can put it on the wall

I am digging your pitch for a reverse black mirror!
- Wouldn't that be called White Drywall?

Yes, by all means let's keep art reserved as a privilege for those who can afford to hire artists. Impeccable moral purity there, Watson!
- There are literally millions of pieces of art everywhere that are free or basically free to view and in many cases use for whatever your heart desires. This is about not getting exactly the piece of art you want to see created and as it turns out there is another alternative open to those without the money to pay artists.
  
  And how does it benefit artists if I search through those millions of free things instead of using a tool to make exactly what I want? I mean, I also built my own deck, drywalled and painted most of my house, changed the plumbing and wiring, put on roofing... I can't even think of all the things I've done instead of hiring somebody. And I learned it all by imitating professional work. Does that make me evil? Did I "steal" from them? Should I not be allowed to own power tools because they take work away from craftspeople?
  
  But now there is a way to get "exactly the piece of art you want to see created" for free with little effort. Are you saying I should just pretend that doesn't exist?
- It's not better to keep artists work reserve to anybody who can pay for it as opposed to just stealing their work?
  
  False dichotomy. You call what AI does "stealing" but I don't, I see it as the same process we all use when we learn an art, skill or a craft. We spend years looking at examples of other people's work and (in your terms) "stealing" something from them. And no, I don't think that's wrong. Stealing is where you take something and the other person doesn't have it anymore. Stealing is wrong, but mislabeling something as stealing doesn't make it stealing.
- Or... Learn how to draw?
  
  I've tried and the results are pathetic.

In the meantime in the programming corner of the internet:
Our code. 🤓

I care about these wanks as equally as I care about all the wanks involved in making motion animation, musical art, nft’s, or any other bullshit without inherent value, I’m gonna consume and use however tf I want. “This computer can create things using reference material that includes my thing, omg, wtf, I can’t handle it!?!? Screeeeee”
Bunch of idiots
- motion animation, musical art, nft’s, or any other bullshit without inherent value
  If you think that music and cartoons have no inherent value, I guess it would make sense that you’d settle for AI slop. No accounting for taste.
  I’m guessing you don’t ascribe to the labor theory of value?
- Alright dork

Yes art should be gatekeep for the wealthy. If you're poor and don't have time to learn how to draw, then fuck you buddy, my elitism is more important than your basic enrichment.
- don’t have time to learn how to draw
  You know, it’s not hard if you don’t think art = anime girls or hyper realism. That’s what it seems like all AI bros think art is, though, so that’s why we so often hear this strange non sequitur.
  I like how you characterize broke people who can make things as “elitists” against the venture capitalist fantasy that works on plagiarism, and will be yanked from your hands once they stop pretending it can be profitable.
  
  But the whole point is someone has an idea in their head that they want to actualise into reality. They can even spend years learning an artform to be able to produce it themselves, pay for someone else to do it, or they can get a computer to do it. No matter if that's an anime girl or a Cubist landscape or surrealist self portrait. So if someone doesn't have the time to spend learning or the money to pay someone, then either they use a computer or they can express their creativity at all.
  I like how you characterize broke people who can make things as “elitists” against
  No, you are purposefully misrepresenting what I'm saying. Artists are not elitists. It's people who want to restrict what tools people are allowed to use to create art because they view it as not real or lesser are the elitists.
  And no I'm not singing the praises of venture capitalists either, but I can see how imagining that would make it easier to dismiss what I'm saying.
  works on plagiarism, and will be yanked from your hands once they stop pretending it can be profitable.
  That's the great thing about AI is once it's trained you can just download a local copy of the model and run it yourself and then they can't take it away from you. I have a deepseek model on a raspberry pi to work like an echo, but without giving Bezos all my information.
- What's the end game here for the poor person who is too busy to have hobbies? They should work more to afford Generative AI art? Make it make sense.
  
  Probably to find the small joys in life.
  You can get a free library card and use their computers to access plenty of free AI image generators. So they do not have to pay for anything if they don't want to.
  Is your alternative that they should shun AI art and either go without it all together or work more to afford a commission?
- I can guarantee you can buy art for less than food if you really want to.
  But your problem isn't with elitism, it's with capitalism that prevented you from learning a basic human skill.
  
  Yeah and a lot of people can't really afford food right now, do they not deserve an easy and free way to produce the art they want?
- Who exactly do you think is selling commissions? It's not the wealthy conspiring to keep down the working man, it is the working man. It's starving artists who are one bad life event away from financial ruin. If you want art and can't afford $50 (sometimes much less), then maybe go without it. You don't exactly need it to live.
  
  $50 is a LOT for any of the local art I've seen.
  I often buy already finished pieces instead of commissions but still... Most artists hardcore undercharge... Me included
  
  Yeah I know, and I do infact comission artist myself semi-regularly. But this is still just justification for gatekeeping art away from poor people.
- Art should ~~not~~ be enjoyed by everyone, not just the wealthy, but devaluing the skilled labour and creativity of artists isn't how we get to that. My beef with generative AI isn't just the impacts on artists, but also the fact that these systems are reinforcing the same upwards flow of wealth to the ultra-rich. That is to say that AI enriches those who are profiting from depriving many of basic enrichment.
  Whilst I disagree with the sentiment of your comment, I appreciate your acknowledgement of access to art as "basic enrichment". That much we can agree on.
  Edit: struck through a mistake
  
  Art should not be enjoyed by everyone,
  Blatant elitism.
- Survival takes priority over enrichment. There's nothing elitist about survival.