Pornographic sites subject to the same rules as social media sites

[CarlBar]

18 hours ago, Kisai said:

If you are under the impression that generative AI will fool professional artists, then you absolutely haven't been paying attention to artists voices at all, which is pretty clear from your arguments.

 

And if your arguing that professional artists can allways tell AI from real stuff then your ignoring reality. There have been several instances of AI generated content winning art and photography competitions. Professional artists have proveably been unable to identify all AI generated works.

 

I'm not under the impression that professional artists cannot allways tell AI from real art. I know they cannot because they have in fact failed to do so in the past.

 

 

Your also making another major error here. Which is assuming that all adult art is created on commission and that it is all curated. This absolutely is not the case. The sites i frequent there's a lot of content created by artists just wanting to draw that stuff and a bunch more is free stuff advertising for a patreon like system where the artist receives donations in exchange for posting exclusive content, but they're not doing every or even most pieces on a commission for a specific person. And the contents moderated but doesn't have to be reviewed prior to being made public. There's a lot of art being created where the creator doesn't actually have to care weather anyone wants or likes AI created works  because it costs them nothing to do other than their time.

 

There are also some AI using creators who i've seen advertising patreon like sites. No idea how successful they are, but if it wasn't making some money there would be no point advertising their stuff so there's also clearly some low level of demand for the stuff.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, CarlBar said:

And if your arguing that professional artists can allways tell AI from real stuff then your ignoring reality. There have been several instances of AI generated content winning art and photography competitions. Professional artists have proveably been unable to identify all AI generated works.

 

I'm not under the impression that professional artists cannot allways tell AI from real art. I know they cannot because they have in fact failed to do so in the past.

Like I quoted an article from the Sony photography awards where an AI photo won and the artist literally on stage turn it down and bomb shelled them. I, or we both are, not under any impressions, we can cite known instances of it happening. And that's just in the professional awards realm.

 

Oddly we're not the ones paying attention 

[Kisai]

5 hours ago, CarlBar said:

 

And if your arguing that professional artists can allways tell AI from real stuff then your ignoring reality. There have been several instances of AI generated content winning art and photography competitions. Professional artists have proveably been unable to identify all AI generated works.

Competitions are not run by artists, they are private contests run to generate revenue for the contest. Less you think Guinness book of world records is actually something you didn't have to pay for, and you can get an award for absolutely anything. Yes "Guinness" the Beer maker. That's the point. 

 

5 hours ago, CarlBar said:

I'm not under the impression that professional artists cannot allways tell AI from real art. I know they cannot because they have in fact failed to do so in the past.

Funny, nearly every artist I follow on twitter is facepalming every time someone posts a AI generated anything.  I think it's the other way around, people who aren't artists, can't tell when something is AI generated because they aren't looking for it.

 

5 hours ago, CarlBar said:

 

Your also making another major error here. Which is assuming that all adult art is created on commission and that it is all curated. This absolutely is not the case. The sites i frequen

Stop there. I've only been arguring about a curated site, not a UGC site. You pay money to visit a curated site, which is why leadeater has lost the plot.  DeviantArt is not that. https://www.creativebloq.com/news/deviantart-dreamup-ai

 

 

 

5 hours ago, CarlBar said:

 

There are also some AI using creators who i've seen advertising patreon like sites. No idea how successful they are, but if it wasn't making some money there would be no point advertising their stuff so there's also clearly some low level of demand for the stuff.

You're confusing two different types of creators. AI shills only think they are producing content and that all content is equal. Artists are producing artwork with thought behind what goes into it. You put those two works side by side, and the Artists will absolutely clock the AI generated work, every time.

 

You are underestimating how lazy the AI cryptobro's are. They see generative AI with the same lens they see NFT's. Artists ALSO see that, and that's why they don't want anything to do with it. They've already had their stuff stolen and placed on OpenSea so they are on guard against other AI enshittification of their own style.

 

The people who are doing bad faith generative AI stuff, already let the clown out of the bag. They said the quiet part out loud. These guys want to get generative AI in front of the people who will pay them to use their AI model who only care about "making content", but there is also 10,000 other people who have developed a model on the same LAION dataset of stolen images, who want companies like Disney and Warner to pay use their models. 

 

When you have 10,000 competitive options that are trained on the same data, and you can't own the copyright on what it generates, how many companies are seriously going to use it? ZERO. It's a liability. 

 

The infinite monkey theorom at it's worst, sure, maybe AI might improve to a point where it can produce something that is "good enough" for you, but you know it's fake and thoughtless, and you're happy with that? The AI is never going to produce something you can talk about with someone else, because the AI will never generate that for someone else.

 

Please stop drinking the "AI work will become indistinguishable from Human work" Koolaid. It's nowhere near close to that. People who claim otherwise, are trying to sell you poison.

 

[leadeater]

6 hours ago, Kisai said:

Competitions are not run by artists, they are private contests run to generate revenue for the contest.

What on earth? Yes they are judged by artists. And you could have done like 30 seconds of research to look up even the award being referenced here in this topic.

 

https://www.worldphoto.org/sony-world-photography-awards/judges

 

Clearly you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about or any will to become actually knowledgably about it. At least it is mildly entertaining to watch such incorrectness unfold.

 

On 12/26/2023 at 7:07 AM, Kisai said:

It's absolutely clear you have never EVER spoken to an artist

Sure, so just throw out wild unsubstantiated claims. Clearly it is you who has never spoken to an artist ever. It is you that has no involved in art in any capacity.

 

Here is a really important life lesson for you, opinions can be wrong. Since the above is actually not my opinion it should instill some critical thought in to you that your opinion on this could actually be wrong. You can say whatever you like, I can say whatever I like but saying something does not make it the truth. Now I can choose to believe you have no involvement in art at all and are just have an anti-AI agenda and will do anything including lying to push that agenda or I could choose that you do have some involvement. You can also choose to listen to what I have said and acknowledge that I do and have regularly talked to artists from many different ages and point in their journey in to the arts, high school through to doctoral, as well as professional (mostly only photography here).

 

At which point have I said artists like AI art? At which point have I actually demonstrated that I am not aware it is disliked? You are very welcome to go back over what I have said and actually point to where I have said any such thing. When/if you have and realize there is actually no such statements at all it would then be a good time to entirely reevaluate your participation in this topic and discussion.  

 

We all have choices in life, you can choose to be a better person.

 

6 hours ago, Kisai said:

Stop there. I've only been arguring about a curated site, not a UGC site. You pay money to visit a curated site, which is why leadeater has lost the plot.  DeviantArt is not that. https://www.creativebloq.com/news/deviantart-dreamup-ai

No I have not lol. You're the one claiming that curated site can, is and will always be perfect in catching AI art which simply is not true, at all. Also you're the one desperately clinging to the curated site mantra when that specifically wasn't even what I mentioned in my original post about this. But what I did say applies to that and everything else.

 

The best thing about being fooled by AI art is you have no true way to actually detect and verify any of your judgements so you have no way to know if you have been fooled, how would you lol.

 

You aren't even properly collecting any data anyway, so you couldn't tell us reliably if you catch 98%, 99% or 100% (impossible) anyway.

 

6 hours ago, Kisai said:

You put those two works side by side, and the Artists will absolutely clock the AI generated work, every time.

Already proven false so can you actually just stop. Why are you saying this. We have verified published actual news stories of it happening and you keep saying that actually proven false statement over and over. Repeating it does not change anything, you know that right?

 

Like actually, it's hilariously pointless for you to keep saying this literally in the face of people more trustworthy, more knowledgeable and more credible than you all reporting on it having happened.

 

Are you going to keep denying an actual historical event happened?

 

What is your end goal here, to try and change history, re-write it so something that happened did not happen? You know that is impossible right? You can't change the past. You can ignore it, you have been good at doing that, very good in fact.

 

On 12/26/2023 at 7:07 AM, Kisai said:

You're the one beating your head against the wall and saying silly off topic things not contributing to the thread here. 

 

For some reason you've refused to believe that a curated site, that has a line of professional artists wanting to do work for it would actually review work turned in.

No it is you. I haven't for a single second not believed that a curated site does review work. I literally said and asked what actual method do you have to with 100% accuracy and precision detect all AI art and you haven't been able to say. All you can and have kept saying is that people are flawless and will be able to do it which is obviously not true.

 

Belief that people are curating the submitted work isn't at all the problem here. Your belief in that is and will always be perfect is the issue.

 

So do not tell me I'm being silly, do not tell me a anything thing about how I've not understood anything. You are the one here with the fault in understanding, you are the one here not discussing what has been said, you are the one who is literally denying citable evidence. You are being the problem. You are the one who doesn't like their point of view being shown as flawed, you can't accept the truth.

 

I have evidence and truth, you have nothing at all. So how about you just keep quiet, take some time to educate yourself on the matter properly. When you actually know what you are talking about then take some time to get to know how to analyze written texts and arguments and properly identify facts of argument and scope. Then if you actually care to discuss it more my PM is always open to real reasonable discussion grounded in reality.

 

Quote

He worked as Cultural Counsellor for the European Union, artistic director of Art Moscow and Art Vilnius. He  cooperated with several art fairs as strategic consultant, and advises on collections of contemporary art and photography.

 

Quote

He is currently the art director of Tbilisi Art Fair, and curates projects mainly in photography, the most recent one in cooperation with Fotografiska in support of emerging women photographers from Ukraine.  He also advises on collections of contemporary art and photography and is a regular participant in art juries.

Eric Schlosser, Art Director, Tbilisi Art Fair, Georgia

 

Please do go on more about how you are more credible, knowledgeable and have more involvement in photography than this person.

 

If you have nothing new or of proper merit to discuss then this topic has an actual subject purpose and it's not this. So unless it's actually of real value to keep talking about this and you are actually willing to discuss it properly then it has ended. You aren't changing anyone's minds and your mind is not changing either. Anyone else that cares can look at what has been posted, arguments from each side can make their own minds up.

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

I have evidence and truth, you have nothing at all.

Log off. Clearly this is upsetting you.

 

It is not upsetting me, because I'm explaining the truth, and you are not.

 

I have adult artwork clients. I'm telling you what they said, and you are like "la la la, fingers in my ears."

 

[leadeater]

9 minutes ago, Kisai said:

because I'm explaining the truth

Do you honestly want me to quote every lie and false statement you have made in this topic. I'll oblige if you want, to your PM of course.

 

But no the record standing you haven't being saying the truth at all.

[Kisai]

32 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Do you honestly want me to quote every lie and false statement you have made in this topic. I'll oblige if you want, to your PM of course.

 

But no the record standing you haven't being saying the truth at all.

Believe whatever you want then. I'll keep being paid by my client to operate their site under their rules. Thanks.

[SolarNova]

The last thing u want is porn sites treated like social media sites. Social Media sites are already rampant with more illegal content than ull ever see on a pornsite. Even the stories from the mainstream media about the likes of pornhub having illegal content is blown WAAAAAY out of proportion, I have never talked to any1 in real life who has seen it nor have I seen such content myself there EVER. If it was so prevalent i would have met som1 by now who had seen it.

 

As for the Ai argument. I actually spent some time looking into how one would use AI programs to created pritty much anything.

I think the media 'hype' around Ai is overstating the accessibility of it. Its ALOT harder to get into with every easy to use AI service or program being a paid for service. many of which are hidden amongst a plethora of dodgy or outright scam sites.

Those that are available are not exactly 'easy' to use or setup infact most require some knowledge of programing to get running (more so concerning those that deal with faces and human/animal recreation.)

Face swappers and deepfakes are not easy to make, at least for free. So worrying about a massive influx of shoddy AI content, or outright illegal AI content (which is a discussion in and of itself) i dont think is something to be to worried about yet.

 

Correct me if im wrong but i know of no readily available, 100% free, easy to use Ai service or program that can handle Human / animal recreation. E.G Deepfakes. A simple google search certainly doesnt help.

So worrying about AI from that sense and in regards to the OP about pornsites being governed like social media, i think is an overstep. its not necessary.

 

Now for other types of AI creation, landscapes, inanimate object creation , in relation to art or otherwise. I dont see an issue tbh. Thres no moral issues at play unlike with face swapper and deepfakes. And the legal argument amount to "but mah money ! " which frankly i couldnt care less about , its just people bitching that more people are gaining access to an area of creation that was/is currently held by a smaller group pf people. Besides that content isnt exactly found on pornsites so isnt relevant to the OP

[Kisai]

3 hours ago, SolarNova said:

 

Correct me if im wrong but i know of no readily available, 100% free, easy to use Ai service or program that can handle Human / animal recreation. E.G Deepfakes. A simple google search certainly doesnt help.

So worrying about AI from that sense and in regards to the OP about pornsites being governed like social media, i think is an overstep. its not necessary.

 

Artists were/are still absolutely losing their minds that Stable diffusion could copy their art styles, when the reality is that Stable diffusion generates nothing but garbage, and what's been shown from it is so heavily cherry-picked. The same is true of all commercial and variations of the same.

 

SD 1.0 can run on a 2-4GB GPU, and just takes time, for every try. The thing is, it generates pretty much garbage the further you take it from photography.

41s.

39s

 

 

39s

39s

I think the thing that makes me cringe the most, is that how SD seems to have learned Manga and Anime "Style" from the crappy "how to draw manga" books produced by westerners.

 

Now, if you switch to a newer fork, SDXL...

The prompt for this isn't the same, as it contains a bunch of negative prompts, but the prompt also isn't correct:

 

prompt = "Two teenage women arguing about the price of a two pineapples in a convenience store in front of a male clerk"
neg_prompt = "worst quality, normal quality, low quality, low res, blurry, text, watermark, logo, banner, extra digits, cropped, jpeg artifacts, signature, username, error, sketch ,duplicate, ugly, monochrome, horror, geometry, mutation, disgusting, bad anatomy, bad hands, three hands, three legs, bad arms, missing legs, missing arms, poorly drawn face, bad face, fused face, cloned face, worst face, three crus, extra crus, fused crus, worst feet, three feet, fused feet, fused thigh, three thigh, fused thigh, extra thigh, worst thigh, missing fingers, extra fingers, ugly fingers, long fingers, horn, realistic photo, extra eyes, huge eyes, 2girl, amputation, disconnected limbs"

And adding "in the style of Death Note"

 

The reason I picked "pineapple" in these, is because it's a notoriously high detail object that people don't like to draw.

 

Note how, every single image, is still getting hands wrong, and also ignoring part of the prompt.

 

The idea that you could "low-effort" generate something with only a few tries and pass it off as a professional work is laughable.

 

I'm not willing to see what kind of "porn" these would generate, knowing that the LAION dataset contains CSAM, but there are certainly forks of the model where people have intentionally stolen artists portfolios to explicitly train it to copy their styles just like those who ripped porn videos to try and produce porn. Are you really going to try and pass that off? No.

 

People who went out of their way to acquire such models likely were more interested in creating things they aren't going to share publicly because it will come back to haunt them.

 

That said, that is generative AI models are the ultimate anti-censorship solution, because you can't bias a model that hasn't been curated to have a bias. So if a model learned only on "the internet" as a source, then it's only going to learn biases on the internet. The AI does not have an opinion. It's just giving you a mashup of all it's input sources as an output, weighted by how often those words or pixels appear together.

 

Good luck removing Taiwan, tiananmen square or Winnie the Pooh from it.

 

[Quackers101]

its funny how they want to "accept" porn sites, but also not accept them.

How they dealt with onlyfans, and other content sites, for now to hit them with this? wish at least "safe pornographic content" would be accepted and supported, some that actually is art like some 2D/3D content with very talented skills.

[SolarNova]

21 hours ago, Quackers101 said:

"safe pornographic content"

Even there however you have big problems.

 

Some would consider BDSM and similar 'fetishes' unsafe.

Some unfortunate people believe certain drawn and/or 3d modeled pornographic content, to be 'unsafe'.

It brings into question 1st of all what is the definition being used, and secondly, who should be considered capable of determining that.

 

Do we really want to level such responsibility to those who assign the qualities of sentient life to inanimate objects and 'art' ?

Do we accept the arguable notion that certain drawn or otherwise 3d modeled 'depictions' of certain pornographic scenarios as harmful ,and promote such acts in real life, whilst at the same time accepting/condoning that drawn, 3d modeled, and even real life acted examples of other things such as violence and extreme violence is not harmful and promoting such acts ?

Why are slasher films acted out by real people and made to look real, even based on real events considered fine, but certain drawn pornographic content is considered harmful ?

It was once argued that violent video games caused harm in real life, that was eventual squashed with scientific studies.

 

As far as im concerned you can have it one way or the other ..but not both. I dont care which side you choose.. ban both ..or dont ban ether.. but u cant be hypocritical.

 

Theres a whole rabbit hole of issues.

I do like you 'wish' it could be as simple as "keep the safe stuff" ..alas ..its not simple .><

[Quackers101]

On 12/29/2023 at 7:55 PM, SolarNova said:

Even there however you have big problems.

 

It brings into question 1st of all what is the definition being used, and secondly, who should be considered capable of determining that.

 

As far as im concerned you can have it one way or the other ..but not both. I dont care which side you choose.. ban both ..or dont ban ether.. but u cant be hypocritical.

 

Theres a whole rabbit hole of issues.

I do like you 'wish' it could be as simple as "keep the safe stuff" ..alas ..its not simple .><

as with art or 2D content, agree there is big issues that might not be solved and some that is related to others experience of the product.
safe stuff I was also thinking more of there being no real people involved in the acts, although there art rules could suffer again more so when AI tools get better to mimicking real scenarios or faces, although some artists might already do so without AI.

 

But I dont see how much more harm some of these platforms do, compared to other social media platforms that posts more brain rotting or "evil" content to pure poison. then again the rabbit hole continues.

[Kisai]

13 hours ago, Quackers101 said:

as with art or 2D content, agree there is big issues that might not be solved and some that is related to others experience of the product.
safe stuff I was also thinking more of there being no real people involved in the acts, although there art rules could suffer again more so when AI tools get better to mimicking real scenarios or faces, although some artists might already do so without AI.

 

But I dont see how much more harm some of these platforms do, compared to other social media platforms that posts more brain rotting or "evil" content to pure poison. then again the rabbit hole continues.

Reddit, 4ch*n and it's spinoffs, SA, and various sites with the word k*wi and c*w are extremely brain rotting and evil, and people who post to those sites often do so to engage in criminal activity because the owner encourages it. Yet all those sites remain online. Cyberbullying, piracy, deepfakes, fake information, stalking, doxxing, snuff images, live murder, etc.

 

All of those sites have been implicated in many of those activities. Twitter and Youtube at least have the semblance of being "safe to casually read/watch", though clearly twitter and youtube hasn't been clear of that stuff either.

 

What makes youtube and twitter "better" is that the people using those sites know posting illegal material will get them reported to law enforcement, which doesn't happen for those other sites, in fact those other sites policy ranges from "lol" to "it's engagement, buzz off." Otherwise sites like reddit that want to look legitimate would need to stop hosting quite a lot of subreddits.

 

It is not a secret that troll sites exist, but a lot of people, particularly with political angles, view them as "but muh freespeech", and services that they hide behind like cloudflare, would rather keep helping evil site not get shut down, than actually take a report seriously. The only way a site goes down fast is reporting CSAM. Cloudflare thinks all sites are legitimate, and that they would seriously entertain a DMCA.

 

If there is any angle to "fixing the DMCA", the proxy argument needs to change, to "temporary proxy", because being a CDN should not get a company out of responsibility for distributing CSAM and murder plots.