Hi everyone! This post is on the topic of
Generative AI ("GenAI") images on the forum. I'll be going over the topic in quite a bit of detail to give context and explain the rationale behind some of the decisions made.
However, as this post will be long, a summary of the main 'decisions' that have been made:
- GenAI images are not allowed in The Museum.
- GenAI images are not allowed in events.
- GenAI images are
currently discouraged but not disallowed not allowed in other places (avatars, signatures, and other boards).
Additionally, while this is not GenAI-related it is 'art permission'-related:
if you have created art that someone is using, you may request for it to be removed (e.g. if proper credit is not given, or if it's being used without your permission.)
Please read below for more details, and please feel free to provide your feedback!
Context: What is the problem with GenAI images?
This section is a
very simplified explanation for what GenAI images are, and a few reasons why they're disliked/controversial.
* As a disclaimer: I am very aware of how GenAI works at a deeper level than what I'll describe here! There's a lot of nuances that I am skipping over and simplifying for the sake of brevity. I have a graduate degree in computer science, which directly influences my understanding of the topic and my dislike for it.
What are GenAI images and how are they made?
Generative AI images are, as the name implies, images generated artificially. The specifics on how they're made varies, but the core parts which are relevant to this post remain the same: images are taken as training data and used to train a model, which can be given a prompt, and outputs a new image based on the data given.
As such GenAI can
only produce things that they've been trained on: this mean that, even though the result might be new, it's still a combination of things that it's seen previously and learned.
Why do people dislike GenAI images?
There are a variety of reasons, but I'll largely be focusing on ethical concerns.
To start, as I mentioned before: GenAI models are trained on existing images. The images used to train these models are usually used without permission: for example, taking images from google images, artist portfolios, social media, etc.
This means that the images produced are essentially products of art theft, as its training data wasn't ethically obtained. Often, people are able to give prompts asking for art drawn in certain styles and get reasonable results. This has affected both corporations (with Disney and Universal recently suing for copyright infringement) as well as many individual independent artists.
For individual artists in particular, I've seen the following happen multiples times:
- Artists who had models trained on their art being accused of using genAI (when, in reality, the art style resembles theirs because it was trained on theirs without permission).
- Targeted attacks towards artists done by training models on their art (and in some cases, posing as them for various reasons such as financial gain or to damage their reputation).
These are just a few instances of direct harm caused to artists, as I'm trying to focus on direct impacts for the sake of brevity and as I feel these get the main ethical concerns across more clearly. However, there's also financial damages (e.g. replacement of artist jobs due to the use of GenAI), as well as other discussions that could be had such as "what qualifies as art" and the commodification/cheapening of human-created art as a result of GenAI.
There are
many reasons beyond ethical ones, and I've only really focused on GenAI in the context of generating images: other domains have other issues (e.g. deepfake videos being used for misinformation, as well as the consequences of depending on GenAI both for social reasons and educational ones).
While I won't delve into this topic too much, there are also environmental reasons for disliking GenAI. Training models takes a
very large amount of power as the model processes many images, and running prompts themselves also take a fair amount of energy. There is a non-negligible amount of energy consumed: if you're curious, I do recommend looking into literature on the environmental costs of GenAI.
(However, even if the environmental impact is reduced by future technological advancements, the ethical issues will continue to persist.)
The Museum and Events
GenAI images have been and will continue to be strictly forbidden from being posted in The Museum and in events. GenAI images are not art, and are more in-line with art theft, which we do not condone nor wish to encourage in these spaces whose purpose have been for creations made by members in order to showcase their abilities and efforts. Trying to pass off GenAI work as your own is strictly forbidden and may warrant stricter punishments depending on severity.
GenAI images as reference images for event submissions
While we strictly forbid GenAI use in events, we do wish to bring up a
slight gray area. Though we allow referencing of images as long as credit is provided (e.g. in the form of posting references used, mood boards, etc.), there is a bit of a gray area in the case of "what if a submission is made without GenAI, but one of the references used was a GenAI image?"
We will be evaluating these on a case-by-case basis: the severity of the usage, whether it was intentional or accidental, and the member's history will all be taken into consideration. Largely, we do not wish the penalize members who may have accidentally used a GenAI piece in their moodboard or as a reference, but we do not wish to let it slide for members who purposefully did so.
In cases where we cannot confirm the use of GenAI in this manner but hold strong suspicions, we will likely disqualify the submission from winning a larger reward (e.g. staff favourites) and keep an eye on the member for future occurrences.
If you do see suspicious entries, please report them! Sometimes we do accept entries that should not have been accepted, as some staff tend to accept things in batches and may miss some things.
Discouraged, but not disallowed in other places
While we understand that GenAI images are disliked by many members for the aforementioned reasons (see Context), we will not be disallowing them from being posted in other places for now.
At present, GenAI images have not been used enough for a firm decision to be made, and we feel that forbidding entirely could potentially be too harsh. If an image was posted to contribute to a discussion, it's hard to judge whether this is inherently harmful or not without having any further context. Below are 2 examples that we believe are likely scenarios, as well as the rationale behind the lack of moderation action:
Example 1: Suppose there are discussions about a game and its concept art is posted, some of which end up having been made with GenAI.
While this constitutes as "posting GenAI images", this scenario doesn't seem like it warrants removal or further action, especially as the GenAI images were not created by the poster themselves. If anything, we foresee discussions on such games being centered around disapproval of its use and being educational in this way.
Example 2: Suppose there is a thread about a concept (e.g. a new villager species), and someone posts a GenAI concept image.
As long as the member isn't claiming that the concept image was theirs, this feels somewhat similar to "posting an image from a search engine". Additionally, with how search engines have been flooded with GenAI art, it's also become more likely that people will accidentally share GenAI images. If the intent wasn't harmful and was to further a discussion, then it's unclear whether such a post warrants removal or further action.
In trying to decide whether these scenarios warrant moderation, it's become difficult to determine whether there is a difference between a member generating an image themselves vs. posting one they found elsewhere. Similarly, if there
is a difference it seems difficult for us to fairly differentiate between these without looking at them on a case-by-case basis.
At present, we do not have a metric for what may be harmful. As time goes on, we may revise our stance if posts with GenAI images are made.
With that said: please do note that if you are sending GenAI images to members that are uncomfortable with it and have asked you to stop, this would be considered rude behaviour and is punishable.
Aside: Avatars and Signatures
The use of GenAI images in avatars and signatures was a topic that had come up, and we feel needs to be addressed specifically. Avatars and signatures have had a long history that predates this forum: while some people use artwork made for them, many use images that they have found through other sources -- often these are either assets from other media, or from search engines.
As mentioned previously, search engines have been flooded with GenAI art. We don't believe it's fair to expect all members to know how to navigate this, and for those who struggle to, removing their avatar and signatures until they're able to find one that they like and which isn't GenAI seems like it would be frustrating. Many of the members who would struggle with this are those who don't have as strong technical skills, especially those who are in much older or younger age brackets.
Additionally, determining whether an avatar or signature was created with GenAI can be difficult at times. While there are cases where it's very clear, there have also been cases where it's been harder to tell, particularly due to the scale of avatars and thus the reduced detail. The effort required to make the judgement by the staff seems disproportionate compared to the harm done in allowing the avatar/signature to remain, and making a misjudgement and removing something that
wasn't AI-generated may be frustrating for members to deal with.
Thus, we do not currently have plans on disallowing GenAI use for avatars and signatures. In an ideal world, the sources of all avatars and signatures would be properly credited and thus the use of GenAI for these wouldn't be possible. However, we don't have plans to change the culture of avatars and signatures, nor to enforce this as it would create a large amount of work for members and would be frustrating for all parties.
With that said, however...
Art credit and permissions
While crediting artists is good etiquette if you're using their art for your avatar or signature, it's largely left to an artist to decide on their terms of use: some artists are fine without credit being provided, others will only allow their art to be used with proper credit. Though we won't make a decision for all artists by
requiring accreditation, we would like to make it clear that
we will respect artists' requests if they wish for their art to be removed from an avatar, signature, etc. This applies to both artists that are members of the forum and those who aren't.
If you are using another artist's works, please be respectful of their terms and provide credit where it is due! If you're an artist who has seen your work being used on the forum without permission, please let us know!
I'll be back by Monday for sure, though! Super sorry for the delays in getting a response out.
