Shikapu

I've reached my limit with this site. If you feel so inclined then you're welcome to read my rant. I will also post a Journal with something at some point. I've left the site and will be updating my socials and leaving select images up once I sort things out so that people know where to find me online.

The utter disregard for their users and artists while playing like things are out of their control is too much. They constantly act as if things are out of their hands even when it's an issue that's minor. The amount of times I've issued a complaint to the site and the response is a total blow off has just pushed me further to this decision. DA is a business, so it's not like I expect differently. It's more that I'm just tired of dealing with it.

I don't feel like the AI art situation was handled properly. If they wanted to propose DreamUp then they should have tried to foster a foundation between what they are referring to as new age artists and those that have already been wronged in their rise to potential status. Instead, DA maintained their for the artist facade and spoke vocally about the issue of art theft only to insist that AI art is a new thing and should be embraced. That's not going to bridge the gap between anyone. Not only has DA basically slapped artists in the face with valid concerns about AI art and about the initial theft these datasets are founded on. They also put all the heat onto these potential new age artists by turning them into the villains, cash cows, and unknowing guinea pigs.

How is it constructive to have these AI artists simply have a tag to sort them from everyone else? They are made to compete on your platform with art that isn't limited or regulated. A single AI artists can print multiple pieces within minutes. So how are they meant to compete with one another? How are they meant to be convinced to stay when DA clearly has no idea how to manage their unique complexities. Why would they stick to these tags? DA hasn't implemented any type of tag imposing system that identifies the source of an art piece so that this isn't an honor system situation. I think they're trying to give the mature content tag mystery going on. But it's kind of a little too late. You should have had that down before releasing DreamUp. It's not like time would make matters any worse cause what you've implemented isn't resolving the issue straight away anyway.

Artists that have had their art stolen will continue to get their art stolen. DreamUp doesn't prevent it and perpetuates the issue for even AI art as they too will get their artwork, comprised of multiple stolen artwork, taken. So their repeated insisting on what they're doing and how they're pioneers and everything else is just business speak. The bottom line is that they have no solution for the AI art issue the same as everyone else. They just don't want to be left behind and are hoping to make their service stand out by providing things for artists that they aren't.Further, there's no certainty how the legal side of this situation will go. Adding more victims in the opted in users and users of AI systems further complicates the case of stolen artwork. It puts responsibility on the company, but on these people using AI art as well. How is justice meant to be pursued if more collateral is made by more sites using the stolen data from these datasets?

I don't think AI art is inherently bad. I don't think it's ready yet. It's messier than when digital art gained traction because it's hands off art. I don't think that the users of these systems are wrong for using them, but it needs to be managed. The dataset should get permission from artists to use their content in these datasets. There's plenty of fair use work out there and people might be more inclined to provide data. It's a tool that could be used for so many things besides just assembly line speed art production. It can be a corrective tool. Maybe you keep feeling there's something off about your art. The system can show you using consented worked an image of how you could tweak the image and then takes the image away, leaving the artist to make the edits themselves. It could be used to generate backgrounds, 3D models, and so on. It can be used for artists to code an image into existence or to use words and coordinates to map out a piece of art. It shouldn't do everything. People will feel empowered over numb.

There's a reason why people find joy in things like HelloFresh compared to packaged meals. You get a little help with recipes and shopping, but you have full creative freedom. That's what AI art could be. These corporations are not thinking about artists. They don't care that AI art can be a new form of art. They want to use people as guinea pigs to monopolize on a service that many industry have already undervalued and hope to replace as the missing link is skill. If they did care then they would get proper consent and not create a rift between potential new age artists and tools and creators. It's a shame, because I think that AI art is one step further to getting an aid to help get jumbled dreams or thoughts into a visible or audible form.

I don't support DA because they don't address issues properly. But I do understand that they are a business. They're not meant to be your friends and even if they did have good intentions, which they don't, you can't please everyone and keep your business afloat. So hopefully they get what they think they're going to. But if I were an AI artist? I would just use what's already out there. And as a long time artists on the site? I would move on because I'm just not a fan of DA. They've altered my membership, taken advantage of the fact that some issues don't have enough traction, tried to opt people into something despite the fact that is basically consenting to something for them, their site changes are mainly locking things up behind paid content walls that were once free, and the list goes on.