Remi-le-Oduen 2024-12-23 08:14:04

Long live NG!

ShangXian 2024-12-23 08:46:45

I totally agree with this post, I left DeviantART because of AI. I first tried Furaffinity since they have a similar policy against AIs but it never truly appealed me while I found NG to be the best place for creativity and for my creativity which is exploring fields I never imagined before fully experiencing this site.

More site should be take inspiration from NG.
Long live NG and hail to the King Tom!

ShangXian 2024-12-23 09:06:23

@DanJohansen Most of my online friends come from DA and I am still in contact with them. The owners of the site are quite pro-AI, but what made me mad is that they didn't notify users they would have trained AI with our works. Only after many people protested they decided to add the ability to opt-out your works for AI training but I don't trust them and so I deleted all my works and changed places.

By the way, amazing music that gives me goosebumps! I love it, followed.

Anamonator 2024-12-23 09:26:05

God bless TomFulp and Newgrounds

ShangXian 2024-12-23 09:51:20

@DanJohansen Sadly as far as I know artists like Greg Rutkowski, known for creating fantasy scenes of dragons and battles in fantasy environments, has discovered his style has been copied by AIs. His name has been used to generate approximately 93,000 AI images. If you want to know more, here the article:

https://www.businessinsider.com/ai-image-generators-artists-copying-style-thousands-images-2022-10?op=1

Another artist, Simon Stålenhag known for haunting paintings that blend natural landscapes with the eerie futurism of giant robots, mysterious industrial machines, and alien creatures, had their works copied by AI:

https://www.wired.com/story/artists-rage-against-machines-that-mimic-their-work/

It's fucking annoying and frustrating discovering how some AI companies have the audacity to say their works are unique and hence deserving to be copyrighted. Fuck them! Sorry for foul language but I am becoming extremely hostile to this world that is damaging creativity in the name of profit. I think ai-generated images can push boundaries of creativity if and only if done ethically and under a strict government control in terms of laws. I am glad EU made the AI Act.
In April 2021, the European Commission proposed the AI Act, a draft legislation that set out rules for governing AI within the EU. This draft has since been amended by the EU Council and Parliament, with the final text set to be agreed by late 2023 or early 2024. EU, unlike United Kingdom, has an “horizontal” approach, meaning it lays out rules for AI across all sectors and applications. It establishes four levels of risk for AI: unacceptable risk, high risk, limited risk, and minimal risk. Different rules apply depending on the level of risk a system poses to fundamental rights.

AI deemed to pose an unacceptable risk, including real-time remote facial recognition systems used in public spaces, are set to be prohibited. High-risk systems, like those used in critical infrastructures will be subjected to several requirements, including conformity assessments. Limited and minimal risk systems will follow transparency requirements and voluntary guidance respectively.

I like it but one of its flaws it's its rigidity which has drawbacks for a fast-moving field like AI. Notably, the risk framework proposed may struggle to adapt to new developments. And this issue is already materializing. Since the first draft of the AI Act was published, there have been significant developments in “foundation models”, like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which are trained on broad data and designed to be easily adapted for multiple tasks. For instance, ChatGPT can be used for generating benign text, like a football chant for a new signing, or for malicious purposes, like generating text for sophisticated phishing attacks.

If you want to learn more about this act, here the official text:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52021PC0206

Sorry for long wall text^^'

Thetageist 2024-12-23 10:03:04

It’s good to still have sites like this that appreciate the amount of effort and intention that has to be put into real art. We (well, most of us) are drawing with purpose, and not solely to make a mass-marketable product. That’s the thing that AI users miss. @SouSTAR made a good comic explaining the difference in mentality.

PegasuTV 2024-12-23 10:33:56

I know it's a group effort, but I really want to have the opportunity to someday personally hug Tom Fulp look at him in the eyes and say with a deep breath "thank you dad"

SouSTAR 2024-12-23 10:36:41

@Thetageist Wha you still remember?
The thread where I posted this comic was unfortunately locked, but I think it's still out there :)

I still have this little comic on my phone though :)

ShangXian 2024-12-23 10:47:15

@SouSTAR Where can I find it? I would like to read it^^

Quarl 2024-12-23 10:52:10

It takes a huge community effort to collectively develop a philosophy that determines what is ethical and what is not. I'm a sound artist that grew up on the edge of sample culture and the parallels with machine learning in regards to human sampling is a mind fuck. We as a culture have no issue with a DJ spinning an hour set of other people's music but in that regards the issue is forgone with context.

I used to moderate the audio portal circa 2009 and the efforts we went through to determine whether or not people were submitting their own original creations was by asking lots of questions. We had a daily list of 100+ audio submissions that were pending and we'd develop strategies to quickly sort out the authentic artists and the riff raff. That would only work 50% of the time, the rest we were encouraged to reach out via private message and ask questions like "what DAW are you using, what key is this song in, what samples or VSTs did you use, what is the BPM, do you have any other socials we can verify you against," and so on. We all had different moderation standards too, one person might listen to a breakcore remix of some Brittney Spears and laugh and accept while another mod might be more ban heavy... it was kind of a cluster fuck of human interactions and free labor. It really was the community "doing it's best" at a time when there were a lot of people that wanted to be involved but didn't know how.

Punk-o-Rama was a moment too, it was a flash game built by a Newgrounds user that supplied punk samples and a sequencer in a flash game to let people without music skills feel "creative." You could rearrange the punk rock samples and feel proud that you made something even though it was fairly limited in scope. Users would then try to upload those audio collages into the audio portal and wonder why they were getting banned. There was also issue in that we couldn't unban people back then after they learned the ropes... it was so imperfect but comparable to the deluge of crap mods must be dealing with now. Humans need to constantly define creative ethics.