Thoughts on preemptively banning Gen-AI?
-
If you ban it. It feeds until the delusion that they're persecuted. I think the right move is always allowing it, but requiring a tag [ai] so it's obvious. If people don't like it, they can down vote it. If the people posting it don't want down votes, they can post to one of many explicitly pro-ai coms where mods ban people for down voting. The only issue may be the ai fans are probably going to build bots to upvote anything tagged as AI. They tend to be weird and really care about votes.If they're gonna act persecuted anyway, why not persecute them? A thief might have a persecution complex, but they're still a thief, so you arrest them for theft.
-
if it drowns out everything else, it means that it's being uploaded. if it's being uploaded, then it means the community likes it. I see no issue with a preponderance of content coming from a single tool when the community is ultimately capable of moderating it just like any other content. why should I not be allowed to upvote something that I like because it came from AI, just because other people have a moral objection to it? I respect their right to object, but I don't think they should be able to force those values onto me.That philosophy never, ever works for communities about specific topics, though. Too many people see it in their _all_ or _subbed_ feeds without looking at where it was posted It's also entirely possible for any individual kind of post, regardless of it being AI or not, to be legitimately decent content for a community but still crowd out other kinds of content that the community wants to promote. That's why many places have specific days for specific kinds of content, like allowing meme posts on Mondays but not other days so that discussions still get to the top > why should I not be allowed to upvote something that I like because it came from AI, just because other people have a moral objection to it? This principle basically doesn’t allow any restrictions on any kind of content anywhere unless it's explicitly harmful enough to raise that as a separate objection. Why shouldn't I be allowed to upvote hardcore pornography on the news community? It's not a practical way to actually run a community
-
I'm afraid it's not an excuse but the reality. Whatever the reason one does content for, whether it's additional income, trying to change career or just clout, without reach you don't have an audience. In order to have reach, someone has to choose to click on that link in the feed. I am sure that an image does help with that And stock art places often either have non-stock art pirated anyway, or there's nothing in there
Just because you generally need a cover image doesn't mean that it's good to support systems whose primary use case is to drive real artists into hiding.
-
I'm afraid the result will be exactly opposite. A lot of smaller creators use AI in some form (some better, some worse), where one most probably won't ban D&D from community named "rpg" because, even with the hatred from non-D&D crowd, the interest is too big to not address it
-
Wouldn't that mean that only those who are big enough to afford commissioning art (or not be afraid to lie about generating it) will pass?
-
-
Public domain or stock images combined with an afternoon of Gimp/Krita. Had a friend who started with no experience and they managed to make some damn professional looking art for their playbook.
-
Just because you generally need a cover image doesn't mean that it's good to support systems whose primary use case is to drive real artists into hiding.
-
Sure. But wouldn't such rule mean we dismiss also those who do bring something to the table but just try to get anyone's attention?
Not if they don't scam people to do it.
-
If someone doesn't care enough about their product to actually do work on it, why should I care about looking at it? If I wanted to see AI generated slop, I'd go to one of the many megacorps that'll generate it for me rather than paying some guy on Itch.io.
-
This is indeed the thing, there is a long road between using an AI powered spell checker, and a full AI generated game. Let's go further, if a volunteer uses their deepl subscription to translate an indie game they like (with the author's permission) , and do a manual review afterward. The kind of stuff you can sometimes do for your player, is it AI slop?
-
That is right. But that is not what all AIGen stuff is. If someone creates a cool adventure but uses AIGen to make their fluff box sound like a radio speaker because they lack the skills to make it so, is that a not caring enough?
Nope, it isn't.
Cheaters should never be allowed to prosper. It undermines the entire idea that creative work is of value, and will inevitably lead to a day when artists are seen as as much of a piece of scum on someone's shoe as cashiers are.
-
Not if they don't scam people to do it.
-
Nope, it isn't.
Cheaters should never be allowed to prosper. It undermines the entire idea that creative work is of value, and will inevitably lead to a day when artists are seen as as much of a piece of scum on someone's shoe as cashiers are.