ZacKing

I see. So long as it's saving an artist's job, it's fine. If AI is replacing someone else, well then tough luck on them. Got it. You're still proceeding from the very false assumption that people being displaced by technology and automation are unable to find other meaningful work. This isn't true and history bears this out over and over again. You're assuming that there will no longer be a market for human created art and that artists won't be able to find other good paying work. Also, I don't know why you're hung up on artists going into trash collecting and treating trash collecting as if its some demeaning, degrading job. Again, the electricians, plumbers and yes, the trash collectors around here are living in very nice houses with nice cars, boats, RVs, and sending their kids to private schools. Seems like they're doing pretty well to me. I can grasp history just fine. I know enough about it to know these same arguments were made for all kinds of technological advances in the past and they didn't lead to the destruction of the world economy like some alarmists predicted it would. As far as there being no other jobs or opportunities cropping up, this isn't true either. Who programs the AI? Who will maintain the infrastructure and technology supporting all of this? You seem to be fantasizing about some fantasy far off future where anything and everything is automated fully with no human interaction required ever. We're nowhere even remotely close to something like that, if ever. Even if humanity does get there, well, then I guess people will have a lot of time on their hands to do things like be creative and artistic instead of toiling away at some job. How is this any different than any other profession or career? How are other people all over the world able to accomplish changing careers? People all over the world are doing this every day, but artists can't? You're more than welcome to resist using AI and not support it. Feel free to do so. I have a suspicion that should you run into a situation where you're needing to take full advantage of some medical or other benefit that was derived through the use of AI, you'll gladly do it without hesitation and won't be asking if some artist lost their job or not. Anyway, this is really diverging from the topic at hand. I did want to comment, I don't like the idea of using AI voiceover for NPCs in the game here. It's still clunky and doesn't sound right to me. If it ever were developed, it should be totally optional.

If this is directed at me, then let me say I don't disagree that AI, like any other tool or invention or technological advancement, can be either good or bad. Using caution is a good thing. I don't believe we should hold back on developing AI because it may replace some jobs or industries. If we did that, there would never be progress. I agree that corporate control of AI isn't necessarily the best thing. That said, who gets to define what is or isn't a "helpful aspect" of AI? Seems like some want to say that AI taking the place of human artists is a bad thing and isn't helpful. Well, if AI helped someone who can't draw be creative and create their own artwork by using AI, that's not a bad thing, at least to me.

That's one article. I can do quick Google searches too. Here is just one article on how AI is being used to help radiologists detect cancerous tissue more quickly and accurately that will, you know, save real lives. https://www.breastcancer.org/screening-testing/artificial-intelligence. Should we stop investing in AI and let people die of cancer to save your artist? Google also shows a whole lot of information about how AI is being used for good things like smart grids, renewable energy forecasting, improving energy efficiency, precision agriculture and resource optimization, food waste reduction, vertical farming - all of which is related to combating climate change ... the list of positives for all of society can go on and on. Again, AI is a tool like other tools and technology before it. It can be transformative and a positive thing for everyone. Human beings invented the light bulb too. That put candle makers out of business. You mentioned photography earlier. The invention of the camera took away jobs from portrait painters. AI isn't doing things all by itself. Human beings are developing and implementing it. What exactly is your suggestion? Get rid of AI to save the artists? Ok, then why not get rid of light bulbs so candle makers can get their jobs back? Get rid of indoor plumbing so chamber pot collectors can get their jobs back. Get rid of every innovation and technological advancement so the people who were displaced because of it can go back to what they were doing. What industries or vocations should be off limits for AI? If its just artists, how is that fair to other industries? Or that's not important? I'm not the disconnected one. AI is in no way, shape or form going to prevent anyone from picking up a paintbrush or creatively writing or sculpting or whatever their creative medium is. Those artists will still be able to do all of those things that they enjoy doing. This isn't true either. History bears this out. You're neglecting the reality that while some jobs may go away, others will be created. People left low paying farming work for industrial jobs that paid better. Those factories grew and more jobs were created. You're ignoring your own example earlier of the painter being replaced by the photographer. I spelled out for you all of the different jobs and industries that came about because of the invention of photography. Most people have more than one skill and most people can learn to do new things. I don't know of a single person who is working the same job forever from graduation to retirement. A human being was still involved in the initial input and further refinement of the work. The machine didn't make it without any human input.

None of those things are real. The weapons you attempted to compare with AI generative art are real. I did read it and yes, you did. This may come as a shock to you, but AI is also being implemented to improve the efficiency of existing power generation along with research into renewables and sustainable energy. It's also being used in medical research for cures for alzheimers, cancer and other diseases. Should those kinds of things get shelved to save an artists job? It's more common for opponents to change and progress to try and argue ethics and try to paint (forgive the pun) a picture that technology and progress are bad things. You're treating it like it's a zero sum equation. It's not. For every industry and job that disappeared due to technological improvements or progress, new industries and jobs were created. In many cases, much better paying jobs. Your analogy between nuclear weapons and AI generative art wasn't good. The photographer replacing the painter is a better analogy. Sure, the painter lost a job. However, the photography paper makers found jobs, the craftsman who manufactured lenses, camera parts and such found jobs. The people who made camera stands, lighting, photography studios, the photographers themselves all had jobs because of that progress. You are accessing the internet to visit a website to make a post using technology brought about by progress and innovation. You're playing a video game brought about by progress and innovation. Why aren't you advocating for the game to be shut down because the computer technology used to deliver it to you replaced someone's job? You also seem to have a very negative view of artistic people being incapable of doing anything else besides art. And I don't know where you live, but the garbage collectors, plumbers and electricians around here make piles of money. It's not like those are bad professions. Artists aren't stupid and I'm sure have many other skills which they can use to make a good living. I disagree. That's not really a good analogy either. AI generative art is still requiring human input and prompting to generate an image.

You used AI you evil AI proponent you! 🤣

For those who are thinking that Lex doctored Jor-El's message, he didn't. Directly from James Gunn himself. https://www.superherohype.com/news/613782-superman-jor-el-message-real-fake-james-gunn-origin

Gotta say, it's totally hilarious for an opponent of generative AI to make claims about detrimental and destructive impacts to the game population and community, yet won't provide any actual measurable evidence to support that claim. Though, reading your posts again ... off-hand dismissals, refusal to provide any additional data sources outside of hyberole and conjecture, shifting of goalposts, diatribes via personal opinions, ignoring legitimate counter arguments... maybe you should use ChatGPT. It could help you with your posts. How far back would you like to take this? What about the descendants of the people who were killed by rocks and sticks when humans first started crafting weapons? Well no, you tried to draw the equivalence between a weapon of mass destruction and AI generated art. One is meant to kill people en masse. The other isn't. I agree, we should do something about weapons of mass destruction. AI generated art? Not so much. That's the nature of human progress. Some things are destroyed and others are created. That's not going to change. This also seems to proceed from the very false assumption that people who may have lost a job due to automation or technology were unable to find another job. What about when those technologies that replaced a human being helped make things better/cheaper/more effective for the general public? I don't have such a negative view of it. If AI can be used to help improve lives and better educate people so they don't have to work in physical labor jobs in favor of better paying jobs, that's a good thing. I don't know what the future holds. Nobody does. They still have legal recourse even in the age of AI generated art. That doesn't make it right. I think it can be argued that AI is the new pen and paper or paint or clay. It's just a different tool.

I wasn't the one making claims about how AI generated art is "impacting the game" by "sustaining the community by negating outside interest". The onus isn't on me to provide quantifiable data. That's on the people making those claims. What's the overall impact? Is there any impact at all? How big or small is said impact? So how many people were driven away by AI generated art on the HC Discord? How many joined specifically because there is AI generated art posted there? I'm sorry if I don't believe a few people posting on social media that they don't like HC because of AI art equates to any measurable impact on the community in general. From the numbers we can see, the relative population has been stable. Excelsior is in the red most nights now. Seems to me that AI art isn't driving people away in droves. And all of that will more than likely eventually change when AI is capable of programming game code through prompts. None of which means artists with real artistic skill cannot share and promote their work here on the forums or on Discord. Why don't you ask the GMs here to create a specific subforum here and on the HC Discord for non-AI generated art?

How is this any different than before? An artist posting their work online had to contend with others stealing their work and claiming it as their own or directly copying it.

Right because the false equivalence of AI generated art and nuclear weapons are totally the same thing... 🙄 Humanity is still here even with nuclear weapons by the way. These same arguments were made for every invention from light bulbs replacing candle makers, automobiles replacing horses, the cotton gin replacing manual laborers, desktop computers using CAD software replacing pen and paper draftsman ... that list can go on and on and on and on. People can and have moved on to do other things, learn other skills and get other jobs. This view is also squarely focused only on potential negative aspects of AI and its effects on society. I'm guessing you don't believe there's anything good that will come from the development AI? Things like vast improvements in medical research into curing disease, improvements to clean energy, resource conservation, understanding of physics and the universe ... none of that is any good I suppose.

Well, why not make sure if this is such an important topic to you? As I suggested, send in a support ticket and have the GMs pass it along. Have the HC lawyers talk to the NCSoft lawyers. Right and you've made your position clear. AI is bad. Yes, it's a tool just like any other tool. Yes, people have complained about tools since tools were invented. People said everything from indoor plumbing to light bulbs to the internet would destroy humanity and ruin lives by taking away jobs. Humanity and jobs are still here and are going to continue on with AI too. How is anyone "not supported" here? There's no rules preventing any artist from posting their drawing/painting/sculpture/whatever medium they work in here. I hope you all find a game more to your liking that doesn't use AI. I wish you good luck there. There are other CoH servers out that that may not be using AI or allowing AI generated images to be posted on their Discord.

Well if by "pleasing some of the people some of the time" you mean Sovereign members griefing regularly scheduled community events, then yeah I guess so.

If you feel this is such an important issue (it isn't), then send in a petition and have the GMs pass it up the chain. The HC folks can have their lawyer talk to the NCSoft lawyer. Maybe you'll get your wish and the evil AI will get banned from the forums and Discord. I wouldn't hold my breath.

If this is going to be the only measure for whether or not "Homecoming approves something", they may as well shut the forums and Discord down. Whether or not an artwork, AI generated or not, is copyright infringing is depending on the use. There are fair usage laws on the books in many countries.

Yeah no, that's not how suggestions and feeback works.