Generative AI images on TBT

[Hat']

While not being anything remotely close to an artist myself, I have been raised with values, I have also spent a significant amount of time with artists wether they be family, friends or people I look up to, and I know how to put two and two together and come to the conclusion that AI is just a bunch of bull****.
It doesn't bring anything new to the table, it's nefarious, it's gross, it's useless and it will always be. I don't think it's really useful to even be debating over ridiculous things such as "oh but what if this disabled baby with no arms uses AI to finally be happy, what would you say now?", okay and what if the world was made of pudding?
This discussion shouldn't even be taking place on this forum in my opinion, I feel as though it kind of is a tremendous lack of respect to this community that is filled with artists, each more talented than the other.
I am in no way targetting staff by saying this by the way, I'm pretty sure none of the staff members actually like or use GenAI in the first place, this is just frustration in general.

I cannot draw a straight line without shaking and yet I know that AI is bad, especially GenAI. It looks sloppy, and it looks unprofessionnal. Whenever I see anyone using AI the furthest thing from my mind is "I should go talk to them!", and if this makes me an "unwelcoming individual" then so be it! I'm all for pedagogy and not dismissing people who use AI because they don't know better, but I think a forum with such a high concentration of artists would be much more welcoming to even more amazing people if GenAI was banned than to stay in such a grey area and sorta allow it but not really.
Seriously what good is it for? Stealing creative peoples jobs for the sake of efficiency and cost reduction? Generating absurd looking images that, in the process, will consume insane amounts of energy while stealing art pieces from hard-working artists? Is that what we want to see on such a creative forum? I know I don't. I firmly agree that TBT should ban AI use altogether, it doesn't serve any purpose to anyone.

About avatars and sigs... it is so easy to find images or renders that everyone out there can use, you can also screenshot your favorite anime, or if you find a beautiful piece of art online, you can also ask the artist if you can use it with credit, it's that simple.
You can even commission an artist to make you something if you have money.
I don't even wanna use the "Art is a luxury" argument because you can find plenty of undervalued art everywhere, even here on TBT where artists just make gorgeous art for crazy cheap or even for free.


I suppose many of what I've said has already been mentioned, sorry if it was, but this is how I feel and I wanted to share my thoughts on it.

 

[Yoshi155]

I mean, someone still had to make the art, official art or not. But I see your point.

If the majority opinion is that Gen AI is banned across the board, majority rules. I accept this. However, personally, I think members reporting other members for using Gen AI for avatars/sigs is a type of policing I don't like seeing in my communities. I think it makes sense for events. I don't think it makes sense for avatars/sigs.

(late reply, I know. I was debating whether I felt it was necessary to respond or not) Agree to disagree I guess. Echoing the sentiment of the last two posts, I personally think it would only be a good thing if gen ai pfps and sigs were to be banned. Reporting people who are using them, unintentionally (which will probably be the more common case) or intentionally, is the only way to stop ai art from being used like that alongside educating people on why it’s wrong.

 

[Sheando]

I mean, someone still had to make the art, official art or not. But I see your point.

If the majority opinion is that Gen AI is banned across the board, majority rules. I accept this. However, personally, I think members reporting other members for using Gen AI for avatars/sigs is a type of policing I don't like seeing in my communities. I think it makes sense for events. I don't think it makes sense for avatars/sigs.

Official art is deliberately created to be promotional. Nintendo WANTS you to use and spread these images because they are official content designed to make their games as mainstream as possible. Nintendo is not hoping that you will never mention Super Mario Sunshine or spread images related to the game that they themselves have already made publicly available. Nintendo is a company seeking to make money; they benefit when you, via your avatar, remind me that piantas exist, and by doing so, remind me that Nintendo exists, that I played Super Mario Sunshine in elementary school, that I feel nostalgia for Nintendo, that I feel loyalty to the brand, etc. And most importantly, the artist who designed your avatar was paid for making that art by Nintendo and agreed to Nintendo's use of the images for public promotion, unless Nintendo themselves obtained the art by illegal means such as fraudulent contracts or refusal to pay artists after the fact.

A GenAI "art maker" that was trained on random DeviantArt posts is the complete opposite of this. Unlike the creator of the image in your avatar, the artists who drew that art did not consent to the use of their art and were not paid for their art. GenAI developers have stated outright that it would not be possible to have Generative AI as we know it now without mass scale art theft (and theft of other things, like text)--this argument was intended to frame ethical behavior as impossible and unrealistic, as if stealing becomes okay as long as it allows new technology to exist. A video game studio who insisted that they had to copy assets from other artists and video games because they couldn't afford to actually pay anyone would be legally liable and could be charged in court.

It's also worth mentioning that the use of Generative AI provides additional money, power, and cultural resources to the small number of wealthy, corrupt men who are already trying to shoehorn GenAI into everything, expecting to do illegal and unethical things with no repercussions. It's true that stealing someone's Sonic the Hedgehog pixel art from a defunct forum would also be wrong for me to do, but it does not directly put more money in the pockets of evil billionaires who are deliberately destroying the planet and its inhabitants, nor does it confer additional influence on them in the form of interest and engagement with their product.

Finally, while I certainly think that art theft is disgusting and I am appalled for all the artists, writers, and anyone else who has has their time and effort and creative energy leeched by this monstrosity, art theft is by no means the only, or even the primary, objection to Generative AI. Our U.S. president recently scaled back environmental and health regulations specifically to allow for the rapid expansion of Generative AI to benefit other national and global billionaires who want this technology solidified into our government's infrastructure. These regulations existed to try to ensure clean water for cities, the preservation of large swaths of nationally protected land, and the protection of U.S. residents (especially those in low-income areas, who are disproportionately more likely to be people of color) from horrors like sharply increased cancer risk, brain injuries, and lung disease. Generative AI is literally siphoning water away from already-exploited communities and producing mass amounts of destructive "runoff" in the form of damage to surrounding land, water, animals, and breathable air. That's why I'm in favor of banning it on TBT.

 

[-Lumi-]

I would like to also add my voice into the ring of people who would prefer to see AI art simply banned. I see no reason why we should entertain having AI art on the website. It's harmful to artists and the creation of AI is harmful to the environment.

 

[Gabby]

Official art is deliberately created to be promotional. Nintendo WANTS you to use and spread these images because they are official content designed to make their games as mainstream as possible. Nintendo is not hoping that you will never mention Super Mario Sunshine or spread images related to the game that they themselves have already made publicly available. Nintendo is a company seeking to make money; they benefit when you, via your avatar, remind me that piantas exist, and by doing so, remind me that Nintendo exists, that I played Super Mario Sunshine in elementary school, that I feel nostalgia for Nintendo, that I feel loyalty to the brand, etc. And most importantly, the artist who designed your avatar was paid for making that art by Nintendo and agreed to Nintendo's use of the images for public promotion, unless Nintendo themselves obtained the art by illegal means such as fraudulent contracts or refusal to pay artists after the fact.

A GenAI "art maker" that was trained on random DeviantArt posts is the complete opposite of this. Unlike the creator of the image in your avatar, the artists who drew that art did not consent to the use of their art and were not paid for their art. GenAI developers have stated outright that it would not be possible to have Generative AI as we know it now without mass scale art theft (and theft of other things, like text)--this argument was intended to frame ethical behavior as impossible and unrealistic, as if stealing becomes okay as long as it allows new technology to exist. A video game studio who insisted that they had to copy assets from other artists and video games because they couldn't afford to actually pay anyone would be legally liable and could be charged in court.

It's also worth mentioning that the use of Generative AI provides additional money, power, and cultural resources to the small number of wealthy, corrupt men who are already trying to shoehorn GenAI into everything, expecting to do illegal and unethical things with no repercussions. It's true that stealing someone's Sonic the Hedgehog pixel art from a defunct forum would also be wrong for me to do, but it does not directly put more money in the pockets of evil billionaires who are deliberately destroying the planet and its inhabitants, nor does it confer additional influence on them in the form of interest and engagement with their product.

Finally, while I certainly think that art theft is disgusting and I am appalled for all the artists, writers, and anyone else who has has their time and effort and creative energy leeched by this monstrosity, art theft is by no means the only, or even the primary, objection to Generative AI. Our U.S. president recently scaled back environmental and health regulations specifically to allow for the rapid expansion of Generative AI to benefit other national and global billionaires who want this technology solidified into our government's infrastructure. These regulations existed to try to ensure clean water for cities, the preservation of large swaths of nationally protected land, and the protection of U.S. residents (especially those in low-income areas, who are disproportionately more likely to be people of color) from horrors like sharply increased cancer risk, brain injuries, and lung disease. Generative AI is literally siphoning water away from already-exploited communities and producing mass amounts of destructive "runoff" in the form of damage to surrounding land, water, animals, and breathable air. That's why I'm in favor of banning it on TBT.

I appreciate your response and I think you make some good points. I still feel that users reporting users for Gen AI in their avatars and signatures is a cop-like and weird behavior, regardless of the objections to Gen AI. I don't use Gen AI. I agree largely with your points. My point around stealing my avatar from google images is that I foresee Gen AI being used similarly to how google images is used today. I feel my posts have been construed into people interpreting me as some pro-Gen AI user when in actuality, I don't use Gen AI and don't really care to. I don't think I've ever really made the point that Gen AI is a good thing for the world or that I'm for its use - my points have been from the perspective of being realistic about it being in the world. I'm also saying that I don't like the idea of users reporting other users for personal expression. I do think people will be using Gen AI to express themselves regardless of the issues surrounding it or anyone's personal opinions about it.

I'm pretty outnumbered here and I see that, so, I'm not really going to continue this discussion. I think I've made my point, and the responses to my posts seem to be attempting to educate me around Gen AI, which I appreciate, but I've never said throughout this thread that I'm pro-AI or that it is a good addition to the world. My official opinion on Gen AI on TBT is that it shouldn't be used for events or contests, but should be fine for avatars and signatures. This is the last I'm going to speak on this. Thanks.

 

[oath2order]

Clarifying, I am not a fan of generative AI art, but I had a thought: What happens if Nintendo starts using Generative AI for promo material?

 

[kindheartedhog]

Just hopping in here with my input as a commercial artist. But when you are doing commercial work, you are compensated for said work. So when you sign your contract & rights away the company is under no obligation to credit you - and you are paid based on this fact. So there’s a difference between using say for example and official piece of Mario artwork and not providing credit, and saving someone’s Mario fanart and not providing credit

I mean, someone still had to make the art, official art or not. But I see your point.

If the majority opinion is that Gen AI is banned across the board, majority rules. I accept this. However, personally, I think members reporting other members for using Gen AI for avatars/sigs is a type of policing I don't like seeing in my communities. I think it makes sense for events. I don't think it makes sense for avatars/sigs.

 

[Mistreil]

Hi! I know I said I'd post by today, but I ended up losing like 3 days of my week to being mostly bedridden/asleep so I'm sort of scrambling to get things in order I'll be back by Monday for sure, though! Super sorry for the delays in getting a response out.

(I'm fine now, for the record! It was just weird debilitating pain for a few days, and lots of fatigue. I still have no idea what that was about, but I'm doing much better!)

 

[Mistreil]

Hi everyone! Apologies for the delay on a response - I've finally had time to organize and sort things out, so without further ado: an update!

Summary
Since this post itself is a bit long, below is a very brief summary of the main points:

• We have revised our stance: GenAI images are not allowed on the forum (in posts, avatars, or signatures.)
• GenAI images will be handled on a report-basis, with the members making the reports responsible for explaining why they believe it is made with GenAI.
  • GenAI images in avatars/signatures will be treated like signature violations.
  • GenAI images in posts will be treated as low quality posts*
• In the near future, we will be making a general purpose thread for helping with avatars and signatures: this is where members can ask if an image they want to use is GenAI or not, or for help finding an avatar/signature that they could use!
  • This thread will also be where our list of alternative image resources for avatars and signatures will be more permanently housed. For now, this list is at the bottom of this post!

* There may be exceptions to this, to be determined on a case-by-case basis. For example, games that have GenAI concept art and discussions that emerge as a result may be acceptable, depending on how discussions progress.

Forum-wide ban on GenAI images
This is a change in our initial stance, as we've received more feedback and found ways to address our initial concerns with a forum-wide ban. The below were the main points of concern, both raised in this thread and for our initial decision (in no particular order):

1. Member frustration in finding suitable avatars/signatures
2. Moderation workload and difficulties in terms of identification of GenAI images
3. Handling of ambiguous cases, especially artists being reported for GenAI images
4. Expected level of punishment for GenAI image use, especially in scenarios wherein its use is potentially permissible such as reposting concept art for games that use GenAI
5. Potential behaviour around reporting members using GenAI images

Member frustration in finding suitable avatars/signatures
For (1), we will be creating a thread dedicated to helping with avatars and signatures where all members can contribute and assist! At present, The Signature Guide is the best existing thread for this purpose, but a more dedicated thread with a clear purpose for members and staff to help each other will be made in the near future for this purpose*! We're hoping this will help minimize any frustrations that might arise when trying to find an avatar/signature that fits within guidelines. This thread will also hold a list of alternative image resources (see the bottom of this post) which members can look to for assets!

* Likely to be made within a week or two, when Mistreil gets a chance!

Moderation workload and ambiguous cases
For (2) and (3): we have decided to operate largely on a report-basis. While staff will try to keep an eye out as well, many of the staff are not currently confident in their ability to identify GenAI images and thus were initially hesitant to make calls in situations that may be more ambiguous. However, operating on a report-basis alleviates most of these concerns.

Additionally, members are expected to (or will be asked to) explain why they believe an image is AI generated. While this does unfortunately put the burden on the reporting members, we're hoping that this will both help less experienced moderators learn to identify GenAI images faster (and thus act faster as opposed to waiting for another staff member to be available to help), as well as reducing false reports.

There were many concerns on the potential of artists being reported, as incorrectly removing an artist's work is particularly harmful. In regards to this: we will be looking at ambiguous cases more carefully and erring on the side of caution or asking for further information before acting. This means we will be taking a member's history into consideration as well: if they are known to be an artist, we will likely be slower to act as we try to reach out to them to clarify.

As a result: some reported cases may take longer to handle than others, or our judgement may err on the side of caution and not remove a suspected image if we cannot make a clear call. While this might not seem ideal, we hope this is understandable and acceptable.

Level of punishment and behaviour around reports
Initially, we felt that warnings for what would be likely accidental use of GenAI images would be too punishing and particularly frustrating for members that didn't have the skills or knowledge on how to avoid or navigate the growing amount of GenAI images. However, within this thread, it seems like a consensus that treating these similarly to signature violations seems fair. Coupling this with having resources to help members with avatars and signatures, this no longer feels too concerning.

With regards to posts containing GenAI images: treating these similarly to low-quality posts seems like the most reasonable level of moderation. We would like to discourage the creation of GenAI images, and as they likely will not contribute much to a discussion and would likely act to derail discussions, this seems fair.

We would like to note that we may make exceptions on what is permissible in terms of GenAI, though we have no firm stance yet. In particular, for games that use GenAI concept art, we aren't quite sure whether to disallow discussions on this or not. Largely: we would like discussions to be allowed for the purposes of bringing attention to the use of GenAI as this is educational and will help members make an informed decision on whether to support a game or not. In lieu of making a pre-emptive decision, we'll be keeping an eye on this if it comes up in the future, and we may handle such things on a case-by-case basis.

In addition, as there are concerns about the behaviour of members making reports: we would like members to simply make their report and avoid confrontations/judgements on members that post genAI images or have genAI avatars/signatures. Most of the time, GenAI cases are accidental or done by members without an understanding of the problems surrounding GenAI images, and so we hope members will give each other the benefit of the doubt. While we don't believe this will be too large of a problem, we would like to set this expectation explicitly!

Alternative image resources
While Google images has been the main source of images for many members, there is an increasing number of AI results which are becoming harder to navigate. As such, we will be building a list of resources that may be helpful in creating avatars or signatures that do not use GenAI.

• The Spriters Resource: A collection of assets from various games.
• Picrew: A collection of image makers made by various individual artists where you can create avatars, characters, etc.
  • Different picrews will have different scopes of use - please be mindful of these and give credit (e.g. linking back to the picrew used)!
• Pexels: Royalty-free stock photos, images, and videos. As these are posted by the creators themselves, no GenAI is allowed.
• Wikimedia Commons: While not completely devoid of GenAI images, many photos have sources and details and GenAI images are in their own categories.

Additionally, noai.duckduckgo.com: duckduckgo's image search has a filter for GenAI images. This is not perfect, and AI images do still slip through, but it does a decent job at removing GenAI images.

For Google images, there are various search terms that can be added in order to avoid certain websites or terms. For example, adding -"openai" to your search will remove all search results that include OpenAI, though it may not filter out everything. Other terms may include -"ai" -"craiyon" and the likes.

If you are okay with results that are older, before:2021 will display only results before 2021 (and thus before GenAI images began flooding the results.)

There are also additional resources at the bottom of Is This AI? - A Comprehensive Guide to Spotting AI Art - though these are more tailored towards art references, they are still helpful resources!

---

I will be updating the opening post of this thread in the future to better reflect these changes - but I don't quite have the time for a formal revision! So if the first post seems outdated for a bit... please be patient and I'll get to it eventually!