> Right - because now it's easy. And you work for a living. So do artists now. And now you want a piece of that too. Hence the FOMO. And it will take the work opportunities away from the other artists in the process.

Well I wouldn't call it easy. Creating a game will still take a ton of work, but the art aspect is now easier yes. It has been obvious for a decade that AI will replace people. I guess I just don't care. I pursued an art degree and noped out in 1 year because it was obviously never going to be a good enough source of income for me considering the amount of work. Art degrees never were and never will be. I don't feel bad, there's a reason the starving artist trope is so prevalent. Pick a better degree!

> It kind of is a fantasy, do you know what you will make after your game? Or what those more interesting and complex things even are?

So I have to list a bunch of examples? I already gave you several concrete ones, but fine, here's what I can think of: Texture generation, pixel art, 3D model generation, music videos, integration with GPT-3 to show stories as they're told, integration with DaGAN, voice generators and GPT-3 for digital assistants, generate training data for other models, graphic design ideation, ideation in general. Is that enough? Some of these more complex steps will be superseded by new models, 3D model gen is already looking insane.

> Wrong - it's difficult in its own way.

Generating 3D models from SD outputs is novel, never been done before (until recently). It's complex, but not that difficult if you know what you're doing. I don't think complexity is the same as difficulty. SD can be used as a stepping stone to new things.

> I'm sorry, but you seem very ignorant on the actual amount of work it takes to make great imagery.

I know how hard it is. I've spent 8 hours on a single drawing before. So what? If SD let's me skip 8 hours of work to focus on more interesting things then awesome.

> This is that narrow view of art I was talking about, you are only viewing art in terms of "good", "bad", "hard", "not hard", and assigning a worth and value to it. Sad really.

I view art in many different ways, but yes of course I'm always judging it. Humans are judgment machines at their very core. I don't even know how to respond to this. Not every piece of art needs to make you stop and think about the universe. I bet you think Andy Warhol is a genius though.

> I'm not denying that it can or will happen, I'm arguing that it shouldn't. Two different things.

> I'm not saying this as someone who is pissed that the work I put in is not needed anymore. I'm saying this as someone who values human-made hard work, and that it is a valuable thing.

People are going to find things to tinker with and improve at until the bitter end. Making art easy isn't going to kill art. Making games is a form of art. If it takes 6 months to make a very polished game instead of 5 years, it's still art. And when it takes 1 month or 1 week or 1 hour to make a great game, it's still art. If we get to that point then the quality of a game will just need to be that much higher. If anyone can make a great game in an hour then someone else is going to make a better one in 2 hours and so on. Replace the word "game" with whatever you want.

>I didn't - because I think if someone wants to farm manually, they should have the availability to live a good life, economically to do so. Not just as a hobby.

But this is utopian. Society doesn't have the resources to just let people do whatever the fuck they want for a living regardless of it's efficiency, cost or societal utility. Like what, tax payers should prop up people who want to produce food at 10 times the cost for no societal benefit?

>I want to work, and in the future, I want work. That's the fucking point.

Me too bro. So did all the textile workers, the elevator and switchboard operators etc. But shit gets automated and we aren't sad really sad about their loss are we because overall society was better for it.

It's shit and it's unfair but society isn't going to lose out to benefit a very small proportion of the population. You're gonna have to reskill in something else or adapt to AI and use it as long as you can before getting replaced.

>You may not be trying to, but you're not being very understanding of the artist perspective.

I can't personally understand but I do sort of get it and have sympathy for the position y'all are in. It just doesn't change my opinion. Do you know how many jobs were automated during the industrial revolution? Do you even understand the scale of the human suffering that happened during that time period? And acknowledging all that pain and suffering it was still worth it.

>Like, for me personally, I went to college for something I hated, because I thought (and was told) art wouldn't be a good career option. Then the depression and thoughts of suicide kicked in, I went and got help, dropped out of the MA that I hated being in, and decided to work odd jobs and do art on the side so that maybe I could have a future where I did care about my work. And this is taking a shit on that too. So, I do take it rather personally when I get called entitled, naive, privileged, or whatever the fuck else that diminishes the hours of lost sleep, blood, sweat, and tears I gave to be here right now.

I didn't call you privileged because you're an artist. I said your assumption that most people do something they like is 100% untrue. Just think about all the developing countries in the world, the poverty, the lack of education etc. Do you really think those people are doing something they want to do? Hell no, they get their meaning from their family, their friends etc. Closer to home think about most middle class and lower class jobs. Do you think stocking shelves is fulfilling for most people? How about plugging numbers into a spreadsheet or how about weilding two pieces of metal together in a tin can at a 110 degrees Fahrenheit like my father's done since he was 16? The typical experience is to dislike your job.

>You are right in that this is the course of history. But I ask - who's side are you really on here?

I'm on societies side the vast majority of whom are not artists.

>Do you think artists deserve a good life or not?

Of course I do. Do you think elevator operators deserved a good life back in the day? Do you think we should have kept them around because you wanted them to have a good life?

>Art is the actualization of beauty, changes so many lives, and helps a lot of people.

And organic farming is not only a direct connection to the earth but to our ancestors. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be so automated.

>I'd hate myself to be on the side against those individuals.

Again, no one is saying artists won't be able to create or express themselves. They just won't largely do it for money. They will largely do it as a hobby without monetary incentive and have to reskill into another trade just like everyone else that's been automated. You keep putting artists on a pedestal. Why do you think an artist has more inherent value as a person than say a truck driver? Which is another job that will be automated in the coming years?

>I mean - I just plainly disagree. By your logic, we should be happy with terrible work just because that's how it is?.

No, I'm saying the primary purpose of work is to make a living. If you can find enjoyment while doing it that's great but that isn't the primary aim either personally or societally. Society has no obligation to provide you with a fulfilling job especially if that job could be automated and produce something of the same or greater quality at lower cost and more of it to boot.

>> I didn't call you entitled > >You kind of did. You claimed my take was entitled for simply wanting a good life for myself by working in something I love. Silly.

Only if you think using the term white privilege also conotes entitlement? Privilege and entitlement are different concepts. I would much rather you respond to my other post because the discussion is more substantive then accusations of name calling. My point wasn't to offend you. I was trying to point out that lots of ppl don't have a job they are passionate about and yet their lives go on. Should society suffer in order to provide emotionally meaningful employment to people? Or should they find meaning outside of their jobs instead?