...I think I found some typos
please ignore everything i've made before 2019 i'm too lazy to delete them all
Age 22, Male
a whole bunch
Vietnam
Joined on 12/12/15
- Level:
- 8
- Exp Points:
- 653 / 710
- Exp Rank:
- > 100,000
- Vote Power:
- 5.04 votes
- Audio Scouts
- 10+
- Rank:
- Civilian
- Global Rank:
- > 100,000
- Blams:
- 1
- Saves:
- 0
- B/P Bonus:
- 0%
- Whistle:
- Bronze
- Trophies:
- 1
- Medals:
- 54
- Supporter:
- 1m 1d
Comments
i am very curious about how this will effect newgrounds. I'm not very active outside of just simply uploading things but it is on my mind fr fr
It will help you to read the actual content policies to understand what is and isn't generally acceptable. The reporting form copy isn't what draws the line, it's pages like these:
- "AI Art": https://www.newgrounds.com/wiki/help-information/terms-of-use/art-guidelines
- "AI Animation": https://www.newgrounds.com/wiki/help-information/terms-of-use/movie-guidelines
- "AI Music": https://www.newgrounds.com/wiki/help-information/terms-of-use/audio-guidelines
I agree with the equivalency between AI art and a urinal - both belong in a toilet, not the art portal.
If you want to see AI shit, go to any other website, they have all become overrun by it at this point. It is a boon to everyone who cares about artistic integrity to have Newgrounds as a last standing bastion where human creativity is valued over lazy machine-generated plagiarism.
If only works that permission was received to be used for training AI were fed into it, then maybe I would entertain the argument of it being a tool that could be utilized ethically for genuine creative works. But that's not how the current AI stuff we are seeing everywhere works. These AI models were trained on the art of millions of artists who did NOT consent to their works being used for that purpose. That is why I call it plagiarism.
To put it in the simplest of terms, Newgrounds is not Deviantart.
I don't know if I entirely agree with this because I'm fairly certain that, since we still mainly have human moderators and something is reported as Ai and if questions come about in regards to that, that isn't stopping someone from posting a proof of process in the case that such a situation would arise.
AI bros are attempting to replace creatives, making nothing but derivative art with no meaning or thought behind them. If an artist wants to use AI to brainstorm or whatever, sure, but the use of AI, start to finish, is going to put brilliant people out of jobs, and the more popular generators use mostly-scraped images they don't have the rights to, leading to really strange images made up of mishmashed stolen art.
> AI doesn't affect just still images.Sora AI videos now can totally pass off as stock footages,
And what happens to the people who have been making stock footage that aren't needed anymore?
> RVC is allowing everybody to voice act as any characters,
And what happens to the actual voice actors that aren't needed anymore? The ones that have had their voices stolen by AI?
> and various music AIs (like MusicFX and Sono) are quickly moving away from sounding like royalty free music, even having discernable lyrics.
And what happens to the musicians, all the composers, the lyricists, the mixers, the singers?
> If this keeps up then eventually, everything will "have a chance of being made with the aids of AI". To expect people finding and scrutinizing which one is "majorly AI" and which is not will get tiring real fast.
Watching all these social medias "sell" our (art/video/music) data to AI companies, and not see any positive returns to the creatives who made all this data to begin with, is tiring, too. We're going to swiftly come up to where portfolios of 5-second generated slop is going to eclipse the real art that takes years and years of a human's life to master. The real stuff with meaning and human thought behind it. The real stuff that isn't just a computer mashing keywords into some strange image deep in the uncanny valley. Coming here (and to mastodon.art, pillowfort, and cohost) and seeing the higher ups say "no AI" makes it feel like there's still people out there who appreciate hard work and creativity.
>Newgrounds has, and always is, a place for personal expression. [...] Removing art because it's "majorly by AI", maybe even banning them for using AI, is restricting them from self expression.
There is absolutely no personal expression when it's shoving words into an image generator, just like if you were throwing words into google search. You didn't make the AI-generated whatever; you didn't make the images that show up on google images.
I liked it when the big AI news were things like that AI that was used to identify bread and then people retrained it to find cancer cells.
So where do the people who don't want AI go, then? AI slop exists more or less everywhere else online, I don't really see a reason to be concerned about the fact that Newgrounds happens to be one of the few platforms where it isn't allowed. If anything, I celebrate this website and community for sticking to its guns and recognizing the value of the human element in art, rather than falling victim to big tech trends even if it might make the site less "profitable".
Much like how AI isn't going to be the end of the world, one website not allowing AI also won't be the end of the world. I have no doubt that there are AI people who will laugh, cry and/or swear at this and say "we're stuck in the past" and refusing to accept their dogshit future, but this aspect of the site should not change. Simple as.
@ChazDude
You're damn right, Chaz.
I believe that newgrounds is a place of self expression and of artistic intent, thus "everything by everyone".
When something like AI gets in the mix, you might start to ask yourself if you are doing art because you enjoy the process or just because you like the clout and engagement.
From my point of view, AI is a complete denial to quality control. When you vallue your art, you want to be behind every single step of it.
AI already dominates every single social media because the big companies only care for engagement, and when you can make a piece of "art" in 3 seconds, they can only see money, and the average person couldn't care less for the difference.
So I am thankful that at least here, is still a safe place for people who actually give a fuck about art.
@Zanzlanz good stuff, additionally this isn't a new policy either, it's nearly a year old with us only now being able to flag submissions properly instead of under the spam or stolen categories
@YuriKadry I agree with this, but I would also like to expand on it.
When we're talking about personal expression, we have to go into what constitutes as such. There's a core difference between genuine expression and something that was created solely to be a nice image at a superficial level for the sake of having nice images.
While one could make the argument that, Ai could do that, the problem here in comes from the fact that you're telling a database to look into whatever images it can find to mold into an end result that is made off the expressions of other people and it's not really something that is in of itself. This is problematic to that regard because It's no longer about the personal expression of one's self and the process that it takes to get to that expression but rather a regurgitated form of work that doesn't really have it's own life or voice because it hinges off of other's work.
And that's the other thing when we're talking about personal expression it doesn't necessarily mean anything in regards to the methods it takes to get to that said expression. What people don't realize about this are the thoughts that are put into one's work and what it says to others from those thoughts. It becomes this abstract idea which Ai ultimately defeats the purpose of.
First of all, I'm sorry for (severely) overreacting. The 5000 characters essay was definitely not worth it lol.
Second of all, after a good night sleep (read: passing out immediately after posting this) and reading through every comment, I understand what's the stance of this site. I will still support NG with all my heart considering that this is the only decently huge site for creatives. With that said, I still think that having an option specifically for reporting AI is redundant at best. If the guidelines has clearly defined what counts and doesn't count as "majorly AI", then reporting that is similar to reporting "majorly not-own-work". This feels more like a targeted attempt toward removing AI more so than preserving creativity.
Once again, no matter their decisions, I will still support this site. Just not monetarily, I still need to be able to make money first. :P
vidu3k333
seems like I just headed straight into the fire, but I felt like I need to say it