The one used in this thread: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/12973939

Mind you, I didn’t set out to deceive anyone. It was more of a “why call attention to it” thing. It’s probably the only time I’ve posted anything AI where I didn’t explicitly call attention to it as AI. But I’ve learned in the times I did do that here that some person or other would be upset, pretty much no matter what the content was of what I posted.

I figured, one of the primary complaints about AI generated images, is essentially that they look like they’re trying to look professional but make basic errors. Which I think is a fair criticism. So I thought, what if I use stick figures. That’s closer to meme level of illustration and expectations are lower for it, so if some basic mistakes exist, that’s par for the course.

I did write the text itself as rhetoric and fictional conversation, but I didn’t draw any of the image, nor did I place the text in the image. It was received extremely well for a lemmygrad post. I’m sure it is easily the most upvoted post I’ve ever made. I don’t know what made it work so well, maybe the commonness of issues with landlords, but I can only guess as the responses didn’t tell me much about the why.

One person did say “Ai stickfigures?” which surprised me a bit. I didn’t think it looked overtly AI genned. But I asked them “why do you ask?” because I wanted to be sure whether it was confrontational or sincere interest in where it came from. They never responded, so I’m not sure.

But anyway, the fact that it was AI somehow didn’t prevent it from seemingly resonating with people. I never would have drawn any such image on my own. I could make an attempt, but it would probably look like a child’s fridge drawing and I would have especially struggled with the vividness of the facial expressions, which was where I sought to do the contrast between the feigned victimhood followed by literal mustache twirling villain. Caricature, but gets the point across.

Given how I’ve seen some react on here, I can’t help but think it would have been a shitshow if I’d called attention to it being AI generated or if it had been drawn in such a way that it looked stereotypically “AI”. Instead, as of posting this, it totaled at 111 upvotes and 0 downvotes.

It’s always hard to tell the impact things have in a virtual forum, but with the limited metrics I have to go by, it went really well. And I didn’t draw a pixel of it. This paints a picture for me that the issue with AI generated content in these spaces is not when it’s AI generated but when people believe that it is. But people can believe something is even when it isn’t. Or in this case, likely assume it isn’t when it is. Maybe I’m wrong and the 100+ people who upvoted thought “AI” and upvoted anyway, but given how things usually go here, I doubt it.

I hope no one takes this as trickery or something. Having seen more recent angst on here relating to AI, I thought calling attention to this is an opportunity to make a point. When I went to make that image, it was mainly about seeing what kind of effective agitprop I could make with AI. Maybe knowing this explicitly will inspire some people to think more about how they can use it too, beyond the hated stereotypes, with thoughtfulness of design put into it. I am still determined to aid in strategic thought and practice, no matter how much mud is slung. Liberation demands it of me.

You’re right to be mad about a lot of things. Help me help you be mad at the right people in a way that will change the world for the better.

  • RedLink@lemmygrad.ml
    0·
    6 days ago

    I’m wondering if you read the article somebody else gave you to read (granted, it is kinda long) because the history of Luddites has nothing to do with being bourgeoisie collaborators and the article does briefly touch on the history of them (I think near the end IIRC). Luddites are commonly misunderstood as anti-industrial or anti-technology, when they were something more like militant resistance to misuse of automation. I did read it, but the essay is as you said. Luddite is used derogatory by most people praising AI for any one who isn’t sold on it, or really any negative opinion. Honestly I apologize for the dramatization you didn’t imply this and I was only reminded of conversations in the past over AI.

    I would say we need to distinguish the anti-AI movement that is organizing against data centers or breaking flock cameras as something distinct from the other one, even if there may be some overlap, since one is more related to artists as artisans and the other is more about people seeing direct infrastructural intrusion in their communities.

    This is honestly an interesting discussion I’d love to have albeit it goes beyond the original conversation. I believe dividing the movements isn’t in the best interests, but I oppose copyright law. Even when I make exclusive content I leak it to image booru’s and forums around the topic. So I as an artist I know that Copyright isn’t protecting me from anything. Yet when I explain this position it is hard for people to understand and I haven’t pushed it particularly strongly in favor of more glaring contradictions. There’s a thing people in the creative community like to use to refer to AI scraping as stealing their work without permission and while it does suck to see your work used in something you don’t agree with, the idea of “theft” being taken place when most have the contrary opinion for piracy. It seems to follow a line of “Large corps and capitalists are evil and are to be judged by different morals than workers” and I actually think this is more productive for revolutionary agitation. Not every person needs to totally understand the entire Dialectical historical materialist conditions in the relationship to come to the conclusion capitalists need to be stopped. But I digress before taking this too far beyond the initial discussion of its perception and usage for agitation.

    My argument has never been that AI is better than in-person organizing. It’s more just a barebones call for people to not dismiss it out of hand and hate it on sight regardless of the form it takes.

    Yeah honestly my only intention with the initial statement was to give perspective on the core of community who would not engage with AI. I don’t even think making AI memes would “Taint the movement” as people usually see it on an individual basis.

    Using it to agitate is fine if not less effective for the reasons I described in these replies. I would encourage the consequences of its use to be taken into account for the intended audience and message. Because Creative hobbys have intersectionality with racial and sexual minorities, because they usually have reach to an audience, and because of the lives AI effects in some rural communities. These groups are more likely to have a negative association with the imagery (although not guaranteed) and it’s more likely for the meme to have stumbling blocks in relation to those groups. But ultimately I do not believe them to be a majority of people, but a kind of “light house” for content that hits multiple gazes at a time.

    This is getting beyond speculation. Anti-AI sentiment has some intersectionality among people you might not expect to inherently be anti-AI. I guess it’s my role to organize and agitate the anti AI crowd, and leave the ones neutral to AI to others.