What's Your Stance On Generated AI Artwork? Does It Have A Place on Hive?

in Rant, Complain, Talk5 months ago (edited)


That thumbnail is created with a website called Dream, https://app.wombo.art/ which turns some prompts into an artwork with a different art style. It took me just seconds to come up with " lazy weekend with coffee" and chose random art style that are available on that website.

Now, I do have some concerns and also questions especially when I start seeing more AI art and the possibility of people posting it on Hive.

First, if I generate that art with some prompts that I just randomly think, does that art instantly belong to me? I checked out the web and there’s no licensing term, just an option to make it NFT and also connect to existing crypto wallet.

Second, does this type of content have its place on hive and actually brings value when anyone can spend at max a minute to come up with an impressive art style?

My concern is that people just post this type of generated AI art and say it’s their “art” while anyone like me could spend seconds just typing something at random. What would be the community approach to this type of content?

This brought into my attention when @namiks showed me some posts with generated AI art and I started seeing it more not just on hive but my twitter feed. So, you know, I couldn’t help but wonder, “what’s the big deal?” until I tried and it’s a big deal. So far, I’ve only known copywriting generated AI but artwork? That’s novel to me and which is why I have questions.

So, if you have an opinion, let me know and maybe I can learn a thing or two.


I'll add some thoughts here for context to others though you already know them:

My main issue with it is the lack of realising the time and effort spent in human created art versus the prompts typed into a computer that just combines existing human art to create something automatically. I think it's a bad idea to begin rewarding artifically generated content over human content due to the disparity between time, effort, and creativity spent creating something compared to typing in text. Hive is about the human behind the account, the idea of 'proof-of-brain', but if we reward AI art, does that also justify AI text?

There are also the many grey areas of artifically generated art in regards to rights. Since the art is often a combination of existing human created art, at which point does it breach copyright? Hive loves to push stock images and ensure nobody breaches copyright in photography abuse or sharing pirated material. I think we should be careful with how we perceive these creations, knowing how they're created. And we certainly shouldn't be rewarding them more than human creations.

It is also very easy to notice the mistakes compared to human art. There are forms and certain values which are evident: AI art often lacks symmetry, meaning details on one side are not equal to the other. Abstract art hides this to a higher degree given it is less about the fundamentals and more about "going wild" with colour. But still those differences are evident. As is the case with many that use these tools: they aren't artists. So they don't quite understand what to look for when faced with regular art and artifical art.

Still, I know for a fact that if I started using AI to create my posts for me, they'd be downvoted and I'd be pretty much blacklisted here in an instant.

The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @macchiata ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.

I love playing with AI generated art. So far I've generated over 900 images with Midjourney over the last month. I'll probably create a compilation of my favorite ones as some point but I wouldn't claim they were my art pieces even though I've spent more than an hour on some of them to make them look just how I wanted. Fine tuning the prompts and going through several variants and such.

I see no issues with AI generated art on Hive as long as people are open about what it is. If people start claiming they spent hours and days on a piece when in reality it's a 2 minute AI generated piece we have a problem. There's of course no way of knowing most of the time.

Interesting! prior to this, I only know fractals and it's nothing compared to AI artwork that I recently came across.

Also, I checked, there's already a community on this too AI & information something with decent following and posters. I definitely have the problem with the later where they claim they spend hours on it. After checking out some of them, I do notice the differences between traditional art vs AI art. It's like it has its own style and even with fine tuning, the oddities are still there. Maybe this type of art is inevitable and looks like there's market for that too.

It has a place here - just not a place where it gets rewarded - unless the person posting it also created the software to generate it.

If they are using it as an entry image for a post, that is fine, but they should mention it "isn't theirs", as it really isn't, is it?

Yep. It isn't theirs unless the library is also theirs. Some of them have a watermark from where it's generated so should be no issue when it's just illustration for a post. Thanks for the input, was just curious because there's already communities on it and spotted a post from raw result without fine tuning it.

 5 months ago 

In an ideal world, it's up to the individual communities on Hive.

In practice, the layer 1 reward system makes it contentious.

In the end, it amuses me to no end that Hive tries to be a "social" platform, but it refuses to make adjustments that actually cater to the masses.

If people's idea of "mass media" is to make sure they don't cater to the literal "dumbest shit" on the internet, that mission to adoption has failed from the start. In that regard, it's better to just say we are a niche blockchain doing some selective things depending on our demographics.

If people's idea of "mass media" is to make sure they don't cater to the literal "dumbest shit" on the internet, that mission to adoption has failed from the start.

Echoing what you said, we really should be learning from those that make it. What makes tiktok, instagram, youtube reels these garner those attention is the literal dumbest shit that's posted there. On top of that, it's a smartphone culture where people tend to spend more time on their phone than PC.

Additionally with layer 1 there's also this talk about short vs longer form content. Personally, shorter content is still content and that doesn't mean it has no effort. But the other day, I read recent statistic showed that long form content still gets the most upvote than short content. If we were to appeal to mass audience, we'd have to remove this mindset of long form content is better than shorter ones. Google SEO itself also doesn't rely on word count . They again emphasize this on their recent update to their SEO.

Are you writing to a particular word count because you've heard or read that Google has a preferred word count? (No, we don't). What creators should know about Google's helpful content update

I am not sure how many people here care about SEO but if they were to see hive as a blog, I believe there's a need for them to know how SEO works.

Thanks for food for thought.

Since @pusen taught it to me, I've been looking at it from time to time. There is another thing called Midjourney and it produces much more interesting things. You can use it over Discord and it can produce really good stuff. I'm curious to see where things will go, it sounds very strange to create art just by writing a few words on there and owning it. We'll see how Hive reacts to it in the future.

There's already a community over it and some of them are well-rewarded. I can see a few ways these can be used, instead of using stock images, why not generate these to create a great thumbnail for a post. The latter is a bit on the grey side when someone tries to claim they spend hours for an art that actually just generated for couple of minutes at max. That's why I wonder if these thing that basically efforless stuff could get value on hive. Although you also have to read comment from @namiks which adds another perspective to this.

I read it and I agree with him. I don't think there is any harm in using them as images to support your idea rather than sharing them as "my artwork". I mean just like images from pixabay or pexels.

AI GENERATED art is fascinating how ever i kinda feel it lacks details and that depth but theres a pro too people who enjoy abstract art love it cause u can see what u want in them

It's definitely interesting phenomenon. IMO, The community sort of need to come in terms and find middle ground as to where to put these things. Can it be rewarded? or rather will it be seen as farming? I personally fail to see the value if it's only just 2 seconds work whereas artist spend hours perfecting their art. Not to mention if they have the audacity to say, it's their "Artwork" and not mentioning where they generate it from.

I highly agree but also like u know there used to be messengers and then now we have phones sms and stuff its quick yet I would rather buy and high quality art then a random generated picture

Generative art isn't going away. I love using the AI and at this stage, it takes a fair amount of prompt skill and photoshop to produce decent images. I can still tell the difference between people who dump the raw output of prompts in here to farm upvotes and those who have made something interesting. The same goes for running images through deep dream or other filters and drawing programs. As a curator, I do think that generative art has a place and I need to know the how to spot all these things and I'm happy to curate AI art that has been worked on, not just raw outputs but it is a tricky thing

As a curator, I would be fine if there's additional value (fine tuning) or simply using it as a thumbnail of the post. But like you said, it's a tricky thing around here if we want to reward it. If I go by personal choice, I wouldn't just upvote raw generated AI art. Thanks for the input since like you said generative art isn't going away !

if I generate that art with some prompts that I just randomly think, does that art instantly belong to me?

I looked up copyright for DreamStudio (Stable Diffusion). In short, it seems that art belongs to everyone. Heh. I'll paste what I found below. As far as everything else regarding generated art, I say bring it on.


The public domain is not a unified concept across legal jurisdictions, thus the specific affirmation you make when using the DreamStudio Beta and the Stable Diffusion services is that of the CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication [available at https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/]. Any/all users (including “Affirmers” as described in the Universal Public Domain Dedication) expressly agree to the entirety of the referenced and incorporated Universal Public Domain Dedication, which includes, but is not limited to, the following:
. . . .

Waiver. To the greatest extent permitted by, but not in contravention of, applicable law, Affirmer hereby overtly, fully, permanently, irrevocably and unconditionally waives, abandons, and surrenders all of Affirmer's Copyright and Related Rights and associated claims and causes of action, whether now known or unknown (including existing as well as future claims and causes of action), in the Work (i) in all territories worldwide, (ii) for the maximum duration provided by applicable law or treaty (including future time extensions), (iii) in any current or future medium and for any number of copies, and (iv) for any purpose whatsoever, including without limitation commercial, advertising or promotional purposes (the "Waiver"). Affirmer makes the Waiver for the benefit of each member of the public at large and to the detriment of Affirmer's heirs and successors, fully intending that such Waiver shall not be subject to revocation, rescission, cancellation, termination, or any other legal or equitable action to disrupt the quiet enjoyment of the Work by the public as contemplated by Affirmer's express Statement of Purpose.
. . . .

All users, by use of DreamStudio Beta and the Stable Diffusion beta Discord service hereby acknowledge having read and accepted the full CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication (available at https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/), which includes, but is not limited to, the foregoing waiver of intellectual property rights concerning any Content. User, by use of DreamStudio Beta and the Stable Diffusion beta Discord service, acknowledges understanding that such waiver also includes a waiver of any such user’s expectation and/or claim to any absolute, unconditional right to reproduce, copy, prepare derivate works, distribute, sell, perform, and/or display, as applicable, and further that any such user acknowledges no authority or right to deny permission to others to do the same concerning the Content. Any such user hereby waives and does not hold any rights whatsoever and regardless of legal jurisdiction to or in the Content. Further, all such users hereby acknowledge that this Terms of Use will be binding upon any of the user’s successors, heirs, agents, affiliates, administrators, representatives, attorneys, executors, divisions, and assigns, now and forever. This waiver further irrevocably and forever releases, acquits, and discharges Stability AI LTD from any and all claims, demands, charges, complaints, controversies, agreements, promises, and causes of action of any kind or nature whatsoever, both at law and in equity, known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, arising out of and relating in any way to the Content.

Note, that while users have forfeited copyright (and any/all intellectual property right claims) on these images, they are still public domain and can be used by anyone for any purpose, including by the user. Feel free to use images from DreamStudio Beta and the Stable Diffusion beta Discord service for anything, including commercial purposes.

mad! so basically there's no exclusivity right? unless we modify the art then it becomes ours?

To be honest, I haven't got the faintest idea how copyright works for AI art. If somebody wants to take my generative art and make a buck, then I hope they send me a bit of hive my way, or at least a thank you note, but I prefer hard cold hive. ;)

I also have until now only known of writing AI like copy.ai and others. This is totally new to me as well. As for it’s place on Hive, I think everyone will have varying opinions on it.

It’s a good thing the watermark is put on it, to show that it’s not yours but was made with an AI(another service which is not yourself). I wonder though if there’s a chance the watermark can be removed. That would pose the issue of theft. But as long as people are willing to admit they didn’t spend their time and own skills to create the art, I don’t see a problem with using it. My opinion though.

as long as people are willing to admit they didn’t spend their time and own skills to create the art

From my experience, I highly doubt. As for the watermark, they can be edited and omitted. Some of these AI doesn't have watermark like the discord one where you just generate the art and can download it. Some of the posters on hive did a bit of fine tuning to make it look more "humane" but that's where the effort is considered I think + the effort of them choosing a creative prompt.

If the watermarks can be removed, I see a lot of people presenting these artworks as their own in attempts to deceive the community and cheat their way to rewards. I hope people don’t do it though. That they’re honest enough to just admit it’s not created by them. That’s nothing shameful or difficult to do if you ask me.

It looks interesting, but it's all so abstract. Can't AI do something more "emotionally charged"?

I don't think so. So far, that's what we get. Pretty sure in a year or two it's gonna be a bit more emotionally charged.

Wow! Its a very interesting topic because in reality, who owns this? and who is allowed to use this or monetize it. Never really encounter this til now.

It's currently a debate over twitter and everywhere. I am sorry your reply got lost in the sea of comments😅

No worries at all. I also experience that too. hehehhehe

I dislike the AI artwork myself. It's creepy as hell to look at! I don't think it's got a place in my opinion and I'm not trying to be anti computers or anything but we need to be able to draw the line somewhere. As well, with AI generated posts that's going to be increasingly difficult to spot for new people who are coming onto Hive. I think we can see it if someone all of a sudden flips from one style to another for writing but if we get someone on here that starts posting seemingly awesome shit right out of the gate, how can we tell nowadays that it's legit? Difficult stuff!

This is an interesting area of discourse.

When I look at an artwork, I don't look out for subtle differences in whether it was AI generated or created manually.

I think it takes the creativity of an artist to tell the AI exactly what he wants his art work to look like.

Knowing what words to use and how to use them could be a skill on its own. It might be the future of art, who knows?