posted in Technology
David Revoy (open source comics artist) is tired and frustrated of people calling his human art, AI-generated
cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/tech/p/1317157/david-revoy-open-source-comics-artist-is-tired-and-frustrated-of-people-calling-his-huma
www.davidrevoy.com/article1164/when-online-commenters-detect-my-art-as-ai
Replying to @beep@piefed.world
If it’s any consolation, we are nearing the point where it’s legit impossible to tell and people will slowly go back to caring about the content instead.
Replying to @Grimy@lemmy.world
What does this mean? Is art not content?
Replying to @naught101@lemmy.world
It means that once the comic output from AI is indistinguishable from the output of an artist, then people will stop concentrating on the tools used and go back to judging a comic on if it was funny or entertaining.
This guy draws really well but none of his comics are good. It’s all trite boring pandering.
To be clear, I’m not saying hand made art has no value, just that a shit joke isn’t somehow better than a good one just because of the tools used.
Good content + real art > Good content + AI > boring content + real art
Replying to @Grimy@lemmy.world
Agreed. That’s why I keep referencing the toupee fallacy: it’s easy to detect AI slop because it’s slop but anything well-made flies under the radar. This leads many people to assume that everything made using AI is by default not good and conversely when something is good they falsely assume a human made it. I’d argue that virtually every devout AI hater has at some point enjoyed AI content because they failed to detect it as such.
So no, not all toupees look bad - you only notice the bad ones.