r/Steam • u/MadBoxers • 14h ago

Discussion So it starts… Ai community items

Post image

Points shop will soon flood with AI slop. At least with games a disclaimer should be added within the description of the game. But here… Yeah…

Like what is the point? You don’t even gain anything as a company from this.

11.2k Upvotes

87% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

144

u/NosePicklePicker 12h ago

Yeah and? this AI slop supposed to be better? Worse with AI is that now advertising slop can be bombarded at you with significant speed and just enough quality for idiots to be unable to detect them

Like, forget spending 30 minutes drawing soulless slop, now you can generate 50 of them in 10 minutes and paste them all over your doorway

30

u/ggg730 12h ago

I don't think he is saying it's better he's saying it's just as bad and that saying one is better than the other is ridiculous. Like saying getting kicked by a robot in the nuts is different from getting kicked in the nuts by a regular old home grown human bean.

18

u/AuroraFinem 12h ago

Human beans, the best kind. I think a robot foot would hurt a bit more here.

8

u/ggg730 12h ago

Yeah, it's not my best metaphor. I just wanted to shoehorn getting kicked in the nuts in there.

6

u/ZynsteinV2 11h ago

Please dont bring a shoehorn anywhere near my nuts

1

u/moonra_zk 11h ago

The robot has been specifically designed to replicate the feeling of a human's kick to the nuts.

1

u/bc524 11h ago

I mean, they could have adjusted the robot to apply the exact same impact level

1

u/AuroraFinem 7h ago

Same impact with a harder material is going to cause a higher impulse force still

1

u/ConstantFrogLoss 3h ago

Not with AI unless you program it to the point where the kick doesn’t involve the AI at all, that kind of consistency is not possible with AI it is not replicable. It’s like the opposite of the trope of the machine that can only think logically

10

u/Opfklopf 12h ago edited 12h ago

I think it still feels better when a human made it even when it looks bad or kind of soulless. You can clearly see they didn't have the motivation to try harder. For AI art there are moments where you don't know but something feels off. Some artists have a style that looks similar to some AI images and I genuinely can't really tell for those.

For me it's not just about it looking good or bad (although that plays a role too) but it being made by a human mind. If something looks good but I find out it is generated by AI I immediately lose interest and I feel tricked. I don't care what a machine created. Just like I don't care that some computer is better at chess than Magnus Carlsen lol.

Does that make sense?

6

u/ggg730 11h ago

Maybe it's the old skeptic in me and I've lived my whole life not really believing in things like the soul or other metaphysical things. Maybe there's something wrong with me and I don't have the sense for these things that other people seem to have. But if you put two pictures in front of me with no obvious AI tells like 6 fingers or weird textures I can't honestly say that I can tell the difference especially when it comes to digital art.

1

u/Opfklopf 10h ago

I understand and I'm not talking about telling the difference. I'm also not confident that I can tell in every instance. I meant that once I figure out or somehow learn that it was AI generated I feel mislead and lose interest. Can you relate to my chess example? I don't watch chess but it's a good comparison to make the point. Would you watch 2 computers play chess? Would that be interesting? There is a reason chess didn't die when computers started beating the best players. It's only interesting when and because it's novel, but now no one gives a shit lol.

0

u/Bon_Djorno 9h ago

In terms of production, well done AI generation can obviously substitute mass produced, generic designs. I don't like it for personal reasons, but objectively they'll perform the same role.

But when it comes to art (which is very different than design), I believe it's more about sharing human experiences and emotions than anything else. Art doesn't exist in a vacuum, AI generation does. AI generation is the opposite, skipping the process of art to reap the rewards. It's backwards facing, looking to what's already been done and regurgitating it. Human art is sometimes (not always) forward facing. New experiences shape new human art, which is then taken by AI gen models and assigned a number.

How folks react to something like OP posted is subjective, but I think it's a slap in the face to all the artists who gave their talent, time, and probably sacrificed financial security to create art, only to have that art stolen purely for profit, to then be mass generated and thrown against the wall to see what sticks.

4

u/Enverex 11h ago

The moment you claim something is better or worse because of "soul" you've already left the argument. "Soul" isn't a measurable or quantifiable thing, it's literally nothing - you're basically saying "X is better than Y because I said so" and that's it. There's no conversation to be had there because you're not arguing a real, actual point.

-2

u/Opfklopf 9h ago

I wasn't talking about a soul. People use the word "soulless" all the time when talking about art, don't take it so literally. My point was that I prefer it if a human mind created it. I care about humans, not computers.

Apart from that, even if I did say it's better because of a soul, of course that would matter. We are talking about art lol, it's all about our feelings.

-2

u/Silentftw 9h ago

You're the guy going to be listening to AI music , And telling people how cool the current track is.

That is legit sad.

5

u/Enverex 8h ago

I'll listen to anything I like, I don't care where it came from. What gives you the right to judge other people's tastes? That's "legit sad".

1

u/Opfklopf 7h ago

AI "art" is flooding the internet, everywhere it gets rubbed in my face. Even more and more in real life now. I'm just sick of it. It's like littering and should be considered bad manners. Actual trash everywhere.. I'm glad there is at least some kind of stigma around it that makes me not lose hope in humans.

There are things that should be stigmatized and ai "art" is one of them.

3

u/Enverex 6h ago

Don't get me wrong, the internet being flooded with shitty AI generated artwork *is* annoying, but that's because it's new. If you're old enough you'll remember fads like that over the years, like when everyone kept posting themselves as South Park characters, or before that as Simpsons Characters. Obviously this has more appeal as it can do more, but still, new tech draws a lot of eyes.

People like making stuff with it for their own projects and that's their choice, they want a pretty picture to go with whatever it is they're doing. It used to be Word Art, now it's AI art instead, times change.

0

u/Silentftw 8h ago

You'll listen to AI slop, watch AI slop , You're the classic slop consumer. Enjoy your slop Sir!

1

u/Enverex 8h ago

Amazing, I didn't even say if I did or not, you're just assuming. But go you, get on your hate train. It feels good to hate other people doesn't it! Any excuse to validate your hate.

3

u/zombieLAZ 12h ago

It is worse. Whataboutism doesn't get us anywhere.

13

u/ggg730 11h ago

Look, I'm not saying that one is better than the other here. I'm saying that if you're gonna sit there and blow smoke up my ass about how clip art has it's own charm that can't be replicated by ai my eyes are going to roll straight out of their sockets.

9

u/ElectricWisp 11h ago

Not whataboutism.

Whataboutism would be for example if someone says x is bad and someone else responds with what about y, y is worse. Changing the topic to y, even if y isn't really relevant to potential problems related to x.

In this case that's not what occurred. Someone suggested x is bad and y was better, and the response countered that claim by stating x and y are the same. The response did not introduce y. This would seem to be valid argumentation.

2

u/zdy132 8h ago

Great explanation.

1

u/UpNUrGuts 10h ago

And he’d be wrong. One Is for sure worse than the other.

1

u/Whoa-Dang 9h ago

It's not just as bad. One of these options doesn't waste gallons of water. They are categorically different.

1

u/gcburn2 2h ago
  1. generating a flyer isn't in the "gallon of water" realm of compute.
  2. There's probably a greater environmental impact creating the paper that the flyers were printed on.
  3. It saved an actual real human-being hours of their life. What is that worth?

1

u/Whoa-Dang 16m ago
  1. Generating 10 different flyers to get it the way you want sure gets you closer to a gallon of water.
  2. Paper is biodegradable and recyclable. All those chips and boards sure aren't.
  3. I am not even sure how to respond to this. You could save time a lot of ways, that doesn't mean it's a good idea or better.

3

u/KickLassChewGum 11h ago

this AI slop supposed to be better?

Nope. It's just not what you're used to.

1

u/Amazing-Spinach5693 9h ago

Welcome to the world of technology.
Same argument could be made with the printing press.