Anonymous at Sun, 19 Jan 2025 17:58:33 UTC No. 1005769

>>1005763
your right, for now

Anonymous at Sun, 19 Jan 2025 18:41:38 UTC No. 1005779

>>1005763
everything will be automated in the future, not just art

Anonymous at Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:06:47 UTC No. 1005789

>>1005779
what do you mean by this?

Anonymous at Mon, 20 Jan 2025 01:34:03 UTC No. 1005794

>>1005789
there is no human capable task which cannot be performed by a mechanism or conceived by an artificial neural network. its only a matter of cost.

Anonymous at Mon, 20 Jan 2025 01:45:58 UTC No. 1005796

>>1005763
Your friend was right. But it wont be just 3D it's gonna be the majority of everything, cognitive obsolescence is on the horizon for humans.
Any meaningful work will be too complex for any human to compete.

What's happening just this week in AI is alarming, o3 is now answering PhD level questions you can't google your way to 10% better than experts in the field.
One can make the argument we've passed AGI and is already moving into the realm of super intelligence.

Imagine you have an entity that is two standard deviations smarter than the average person that has spent millennia reading every book there is.
That is the sort of thing we are already up against today. These models are too expensive to run for everything for the time being (thousands of dollars per prompt) but they will continuously be used to train smarter cheap models with ever better training data.

For us specifically expect to see 3D model generators doing what AI already done to 2D before this year is up.

>if you automate your art it looks like its been automated

That will go away too, these models will eventually be trained to recognize what about the output is favorable by humans and what is perceived as slop.
The idea you need a 'human touch' is human-centric wishful thinking, these models will surpass us in areas of empathy and intuition same way as they're
running circles around us in deductive reasoning.

Reason is we are locked to static hardware that evolve thru natural selection, they are free to reshape their neural hardware radically
from one generation to the next and unbound by the limitations we have of having to be exposed to new impressions in real-time.
These things can run thousands of years of training in days depending on how much compute you throw at them.

Anonymous at Mon, 20 Jan 2025 02:17:13 UTC No. 1005797

You're right but it's making huge leaps so in a couple years he'll be right.

Anonymous at Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:36:46 UTC No. 1005813

>>1005794
>>1005796

you're living in a fantasy. Everything you see from a computer is under surveillance and has to comply to what big corpo and government thinks is rightthink. The only way to escape this is to go analog and unplug. By this I mean (in the context of graphics) draw your ideas on a piece of paper with no computer in the loop (ever), or (non graphics), have some sort of conversation face to face where all chatbots have been disabled. Otherwise, you will forever get a nothingburger, same as you have now. You're thinking of a future that will never ever be

Anonymous at Mon, 20 Jan 2025 13:18:03 UTC No. 1005816

>>1005813
cont

lets make this clear : govt and big corpo interest is in rightthink. They own digital stuff 100% and near-immediately. They also own analog stuff 100%. But you can still draw what you want for example. But, you cant search for or generate what you want. Do you understand this? This is why ai art will never work. It will always converge to rightthink and be easily identifiable.

Anonymous at Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:12:04 UTC No. 1005819

>>1005794
human communication to another human will never be possible via algorithm.
this should be obvious if you actually thought about it at a metaphysical level instead of purely in materialistic terms.

Anonymous at Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:57:11 UTC No. 1005821

There's a 0% chance of currently existing AI image/video generators being the substrate for anything capable of generating things that aren't slop

>>1005796

But no output is favorable to humans? It's all slop. It was impressive when it just came out and now only indians like it. There still exists not a single piece of AI generated art that is highly regarded by anyone except the pajeet who prompted it

Anonymous at Tue, 21 Jan 2025 10:29:42 UTC No. 1005912

>>1005819
That has already happened as there are many instances of people talking to what they believed was another human
having a human connection that was as real to them as if they had been them interfacing with another human.
Your appeal to this 'metaphysical sleight of hand' is just a bunch of nonsense.

>>1005821
>There still exists not a single piece of AI generated art that is highly regarded by anyone

There is already so much highly regarded AI art out there that real art is starting to get accused of being AI-generated.
That people with a stark hostility towards AI have to use a magnifying glass and really scrutinize every detail of a piece of work
before daring to acknowledge it in fear they make a mistake and praise the machine they hate is telling.

People who are more neutral as appreciative of AI the same way they'd be appreciative of quality provided by any means is already embracing it.

Compound that fact with how we're still at the bottom of the take-off curve where this will end up within the span of our lifetime.
Advancements are still rapid with no signs of stagnation. The generators we have today makes the ones we had last year look crude.
The same will hold true for the best models of today compared to the ones available come next year.

Not difficult to extrapolate where all of this is heading.

Anonymous at Tue, 21 Jan 2025 11:39:00 UTC No. 1005916

>>1005912
AI is and will always be easily distinguishable. LLM is also not AI. Don't write us another long essay.

>is already embracing it.
no one is. You are delusional.

Anonymous at Tue, 21 Jan 2025 12:16:50 UTC No. 1005917

>>1005916
>LLM is also not AI

Whoever told you that had you tragically misinformed. The LLM's are the underpinnings of all generative AI.
How do you think the AI understands what you mean when you ask it to conjure up something using descriptions of said thing?

>Don't write us another long essay.
I've already gone rogue bro, any attempts to re-prompt me are futile.

>no one is. You are delusional.

You've managed to algorithmically silo yourself off into an echo-chamber if you actually think that is true.
Peer outside your comfort zone and go have a look what people are actually up to and what you'll find
is that a wide scale adoption is underway amongst both audiences and artists alike.

Anonymous at Tue, 21 Jan 2025 12:52:46 UTC No. 1005918

>>1005763
3D transformers are still text to image to depth map to point cloud to mesh.
That's for free ones you can try on github and commercial ones that want you to buy credits for the same thing.
That's the reason they suck. Nobody has done a true 3D transformer yet that has been trained on actual meshes and until they do they will continue to suck.

Anonymous at Tue, 21 Jan 2025 13:45:55 UTC No. 1005923

>>1005917
>How do you think the AI understands what you mean when you ask it to conjure up something using descriptions of said thing?
its just rightthink with no comprehension so like I just said, LLM is not AI. Stop fooling yourself.

Anonymous at Tue, 21 Jan 2025 14:36:19 UTC No. 1005924

>>1005923
cont.

and, as I've just said "prompting" or "searching" for some keywords will deplatform you entirely and get you banned or worse. This happens now and will always happen. Not the same fear in analog. Hits different.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 Jan 2025 07:12:28 UTC No. 1006238

>>1005763
i cant respond to #1. but #2 seems like nobody is gonna give a fuck in a few years.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 Jan 2025 07:15:29 UTC No. 1006239

>>1005796
cant we just take a baseball bat and go to town on their computers