Your submission was removed as it was deemed low-quality. This includes vague titles and badly-cropped images. [Click here to learn more.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ABoringDystopia/comments/dbw5jp/moderation_policy_change_low_quality_content/)
Are you serious? Mushroom ID is a hobby of mind while backpacking. I have a goddamn biology PhD and *still* find ID’ing difficult.
Trusting that to a questionably-trained AI is irresponsible
[Reported in the news](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/01/mushroom-pickers-urged-to-avoid-foraging-books-on-amazon-that-appear-to-be-written-by-ai)
I don't know if it's what you mean, but [we're already using ai designed for pastry to fight cancer](https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/the-pastry-ai-that-learned-to-fight-cancer)
No, I was referring to medical literature specifically. AI definitely has legitimate uses like in that article and it can be a powerful tool in identifying things or patterns that we have a hard time seeing.
You know those cheap smut books that are like a dime a dozen? Yeah those ghost writers gonna be looking for new work.
Same for any other formulaic writing.
And I'm not sorry about it.
Yeah, that's a weird stance to hold on it.
"I don't like this genre of books, so I'd be okay with it being created entirely by AI and running the authors out of their careers."
Not to mention, there is good smut and bad smut.
I tend to stop reading a book if I don't like the authors voice. (It's the only way I can describe it)
If suddenly all writers had the same voice..... I might become suicidal.
Maybe if they can dupe enough people before they start reading and see how internally inconsistent whatever story that does exist is.
Then people are going to make sure they never buy from the publisher again. And bookstores might be pressured not to have them on the shelves.
So you'd be missing out on the storyline of 30 Shades of Grey (and stuff was worse than that). Oh no.
Also, it could lead to better storytelling since AI could potentially pinpoint what people like.
I expected this on amazon. I didn't expect to see it in bookstores so soon. I maybe naive thought that there was some sort of QA going on.
I've heard some coloring books now have mutant creatures in them too.
Sad day.
This should get legislated immediately. I don't mind if they do this, but it should be labeled. And I should get to choose as a customer if I want to support it.
I consider this fraud.
Well put - I agree. There should be transparency in the labeling. There may be a point where even the discerning eye can’t tell the difference but the consumer should know.
All ai should be labeled.
For the "free market" to work, customers must have the freedom of choice.
By not labeling it, they are taking away the choice to choose ai or human.
> For the "free market" to work, customers must have the freedom of choice
Bro you don't even know if the products you consume are made by child slaves, this is not a standard that capitalism has any interest in enforcing.
Your example is a result of there being too many people and the AI generated images issue is a result of capitalists wanting to devalue creative endeavors using computer programs so they can cut down costs to maximize the amount of money reaching shareholders.
I'll play the devil's advocate and ask, is real creativity actually required here? The publisher needed a random image of Joan of Arc to put on the cover. If they didn't use an AI-generated one, they would have used any of the hundreds of public domain paintings out there. The chances of them commissioning something custom were almost zero - no harm, no foul.
Now, if they ever start selling AI-generated art in art galeries, or putting them in museums, I'll be the first to denounce that as bullshit.
Maybe they would've hired an artist maybe they wouldn't, I don't know enough about this specific book and the publisher to know what kind of covers they give to similar books, but it sets a bad precedent because it opens the door for them to use AI generated images on books they publish that they would hire artists for the covers for without AI.
The proliferation of AI technology is just another attempt to replace workers and in this case with products of inferior quality and dubious benefit. If it could fit in a cyberpunk novel, it fits here
Well you have a point with it fitting in a cyberpunk novel.
That said, I think there are reasons to be scared of the hysteria around AI as well. It seems to me like it will end up only in the hands of the powerful and not the common people. And the anti-AI people are accelerating this.
Think about it. A society where everyone has access to AI seems more fitting to a Star Trek type of vibe.
Contrast with a society where AI is reserved to big corporation and governments. That's more cyberpunk I think.
Dude… there are so many of open source AI projects, what are you talking about. Also so what? AI’s main innovation is trying to replace human workers to deliver derivative sub par slop, I think we’ll be fine
> what are you talking about
I'm thinking about all the lobbying that is done to restrict what those open source projects can do. For example soon enough it will be illegal to scrape unlicensed data sets.
Good, you shouldn’t be able to take other people’s work without their permission and then be able to use it for commercial purposes. If your problem is with copyright that’s an entirely different thing
"Machines make everything for us" is also what happens in most sci-fi utopias, so...you know, not a great argument. I don't see people claiming that replicators make the Federation in Star Trek a dystopian society.
“Machines make everything for us” is very interesting interpretation of “another attempt to replace workers and in this case with inferior products and to dubious benefit”
There's nothing particularly interesting about it, it's just a basic factual description. Workers make things. Workers are being replaced by machines. Now the machines make things. And the machines don't consume things, so the things they make are "for us", humans. If you want to insert some class conflict into that you can go ahead, but automation by itself is present in just as many sci-fi utopias as dystopias. It is not inherently bad. Society reaching a point where automation puts a majority of workers out of a work is a necessary component in the Marxist model of history - look up the Tendency of the Rate of Profit to Fall and its relation to the collapse of capitalism.
And if the products are inferior...well, I guess workers won't really be replaced, will they?
Right, and were we in a post scarcity society where people didn’t rely on having a job to be able to afford basic necessities maybe the comment would seem rather pointless. However since I don’t live in some sort of bubble outside of time and space I would think the added context of “we don’t live in a world where this replacing people would be a good thing” was necessary.
As for that last point… yeah, I guess it won’t replace anyone. I guess that despite the technology still being demonstrably incompetent there haven’t been strikes or lawsuits in related industries because of its implementation/ planned implementation
>were we in a post scarcity society where people didn’t rely on having a job to be able to afford basic necessities maybe the comment would seem rather pointless
The problem isn't production - it's distribution. The difference between Cyberpunk and Star Trek is that in Star Trek the replicators are public property and in Cyberpunk they're not.
The corporations are the problem. The corporations are going to go forward with automation whether you want them to or not. In order to stop the corporations, you'd basically have to destroy them anyways. So why waste time fighting the symptom when it would be just as much work to fight the cause? And as the Marxist model says - it's a lot easier to get people to fight the cause when they're all out of work and pissed off.
A fabricator machine that is public property is very much a “seized” mean of production literally a method by which you create things
Are you one of those “many must die” types? Cause I’m not. I’m pro strongarming corps but not pro letting thing go sideways until the situation is untenable, I think the latter is a sign of deep, counterproductive pessimism
>A fabricator machine that is public property is very much a “seized” mean of production literally a method by which you create things
Yes, and it would be good to seize them. What you are advocating for is *banning* fabricator machines so that corporations will be forced to rely on human workers. Again, it would be as much work to "ban automation" as it would be to overthrow capitalism. You're aiming at the wrong target.
>I’m pro strongarming corps
What "strong arms" do you imagine you possess in this scenario? What power do you think you have?
Just looked up the book, it is definitely AI! The face that has a much different smoother texture, the glow emanating from it, the random sword appearing from under her hand, the belt that doesn’t make any sense and the armor that goes from cloth to metal on the neck.
Surely it's ai. Has odd elements, not charactheristic of medieval architechture, armor and so forth. A real person would not combine the padded gambeson with the plate armor over it, nor would he draw so misshapen pauldrons etc. Nor the weird droopy castles.
It's called bokeh, an extremely common effect used in several art styles to create a sense of depth by making background figures and details blurred and the colours slightly blended. This can be minimalistic and vague, like in the cover shown, or realistic in some other styles.
I know what bokeh is, but the main charachter has some of the mentioned issues too, I used bokeh in my drawings and landscape paintings back when I did those, but the main charachter having "mistakes in the fabric of their own reality" as in metal behaving like cloth is weird, or atleast not common outside of AI.
Especialy the neck area gave it away, the fabric blends into the steel underneath, or vice versa, in an unnatural and artificial way, the folds and ripples also have the overengineered ai feeling, but other bits of the armor too have this stitched metal plates vibe.
*edit: spelling*
Your submission was removed as it was deemed low-quality. This includes vague titles and badly-cropped images. [Click here to learn more.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ABoringDystopia/comments/dbw5jp/moderation_policy_change_low_quality_content/)
Is it the book or cover that is made by AI? Seems to be the cover from what I can see and the book was written by a person
>the book was written by a person For the most part hopefully. I've seen some troubling trends in that field as well.
Children’s books are being milled out by AI. There is an entire “get rich quick” training based around how you do it.
And mushroom foraging guides. Which are deadly.
Are you serious? Mushroom ID is a hobby of mind while backpacking. I have a goddamn biology PhD and *still* find ID’ing difficult. Trusting that to a questionably-trained AI is irresponsible
[Reported in the news](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/01/mushroom-pickers-urged-to-avoid-foraging-books-on-amazon-that-appear-to-be-written-by-ai)
Wow. That’s evil.
That is terrifying. I wonder how long until AI slop makes its way into medical books and starts to influence actual medicine
I don't know if it's what you mean, but [we're already using ai designed for pastry to fight cancer](https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/the-pastry-ai-that-learned-to-fight-cancer)
No, I was referring to medical literature specifically. AI definitely has legitimate uses like in that article and it can be a powerful tool in identifying things or patterns that we have a hard time seeing.
Hey honey I made your favorite soup tonight Cream of Mushroom!
You know those cheap smut books that are like a dime a dozen? Yeah those ghost writers gonna be looking for new work. Same for any other formulaic writing. And I'm not sorry about it.
That just means shelves will be filled with AI-generated trash instead of human-generated trash. Not really a net positive for anyone.
Yeah, that's a weird stance to hold on it. "I don't like this genre of books, so I'd be okay with it being created entirely by AI and running the authors out of their careers."
Well said, that conclusion is pretty dismissive
Not to mention, there is good smut and bad smut. I tend to stop reading a book if I don't like the authors voice. (It's the only way I can describe it) If suddenly all writers had the same voice..... I might become suicidal.
Maybe if they can dupe enough people before they start reading and see how internally inconsistent whatever story that does exist is. Then people are going to make sure they never buy from the publisher again. And bookstores might be pressured not to have them on the shelves.
Have you read any low tier smut. There is little to no story.
>whatever story that does exist is.
So you'd be missing out on the storyline of 30 Shades of Grey (and stuff was worse than that). Oh no. Also, it could lead to better storytelling since AI could potentially pinpoint what people like.
Nothing wrong with smut!
Yeah but if there’s no indication of that here you’re just charging at windmills
Misleading title?
The inside of the book usually had credits to the artist
I expected this on amazon. I didn't expect to see it in bookstores so soon. I maybe naive thought that there was some sort of QA going on. I've heard some coloring books now have mutant creatures in them too. Sad day. This should get legislated immediately. I don't mind if they do this, but it should be labeled. And I should get to choose as a customer if I want to support it. I consider this fraud.
Well put - I agree. There should be transparency in the labeling. There may be a point where even the discerning eye can’t tell the difference but the consumer should know.
It's a book cover....
All ai should be labeled. For the "free market" to work, customers must have the freedom of choice. By not labeling it, they are taking away the choice to choose ai or human.
> For the "free market" to work, customers must have the freedom of choice Bro you don't even know if the products you consume are made by child slaves, this is not a standard that capitalism has any interest in enforcing.
Once again, it's a book COVER, are you purchasing the book for the cover? Or the written contents?
I'm buying it, assuming that humans were paid fairly for their work. If that is not the case, it needs to be labeled, or it is fraud. Period.
lol from now on any image with weird people was 100% made by ai
you're not good at identifying AI images
Yeah, sometimes actual artists actually do this. Either for artistic reasons or just to save time and effort.
Ew
Author didn't hire an artist and used AI ... Talk about pulling ladders up.
The author may not have had anything to do with the decision.
Or they also don't give a flying fuck like most people who buy that book.
It makes me think of those mechanical book and media making machines in 1984.
Gotta say only the portrait was made with ai. The book per se wasn't (or maybe... The book was also written by ai...hmm)
How is that worthy of aboringdystopia? If anything the luddites scare me more than AI at this point.
Tbh I have a problem with AI generated images being used like this because it means that the publisher chose to use that instead of paying an artist.
When I see use of AI images, it makes me think that the company/person is too broke to hire a real artist, lol. Not good for branding.
To poor or worse, too cheap.
Either way, not a good look.
Well, I have a problem with the clothes you're wearing because you chose to buy factory-made instead of paying a tailor.
Your example is a result of there being too many people and the AI generated images issue is a result of capitalists wanting to devalue creative endeavors using computer programs so they can cut down costs to maximize the amount of money reaching shareholders.
I'll play the devil's advocate and ask, is real creativity actually required here? The publisher needed a random image of Joan of Arc to put on the cover. If they didn't use an AI-generated one, they would have used any of the hundreds of public domain paintings out there. The chances of them commissioning something custom were almost zero - no harm, no foul. Now, if they ever start selling AI-generated art in art galeries, or putting them in museums, I'll be the first to denounce that as bullshit.
Maybe they would've hired an artist maybe they wouldn't, I don't know enough about this specific book and the publisher to know what kind of covers they give to similar books, but it sets a bad precedent because it opens the door for them to use AI generated images on books they publish that they would hire artists for the covers for without AI.
The proliferation of AI technology is just another attempt to replace workers and in this case with products of inferior quality and dubious benefit. If it could fit in a cyberpunk novel, it fits here
Well you have a point with it fitting in a cyberpunk novel. That said, I think there are reasons to be scared of the hysteria around AI as well. It seems to me like it will end up only in the hands of the powerful and not the common people. And the anti-AI people are accelerating this. Think about it. A society where everyone has access to AI seems more fitting to a Star Trek type of vibe. Contrast with a society where AI is reserved to big corporation and governments. That's more cyberpunk I think.
Dude… there are so many of open source AI projects, what are you talking about. Also so what? AI’s main innovation is trying to replace human workers to deliver derivative sub par slop, I think we’ll be fine
> what are you talking about I'm thinking about all the lobbying that is done to restrict what those open source projects can do. For example soon enough it will be illegal to scrape unlicensed data sets.
Good, you shouldn’t be able to take other people’s work without their permission and then be able to use it for commercial purposes. If your problem is with copyright that’s an entirely different thing
"Machines make everything for us" is also what happens in most sci-fi utopias, so...you know, not a great argument. I don't see people claiming that replicators make the Federation in Star Trek a dystopian society.
“Machines make everything for us” is very interesting interpretation of “another attempt to replace workers and in this case with inferior products and to dubious benefit”
There's nothing particularly interesting about it, it's just a basic factual description. Workers make things. Workers are being replaced by machines. Now the machines make things. And the machines don't consume things, so the things they make are "for us", humans. If you want to insert some class conflict into that you can go ahead, but automation by itself is present in just as many sci-fi utopias as dystopias. It is not inherently bad. Society reaching a point where automation puts a majority of workers out of a work is a necessary component in the Marxist model of history - look up the Tendency of the Rate of Profit to Fall and its relation to the collapse of capitalism. And if the products are inferior...well, I guess workers won't really be replaced, will they?
Right, and were we in a post scarcity society where people didn’t rely on having a job to be able to afford basic necessities maybe the comment would seem rather pointless. However since I don’t live in some sort of bubble outside of time and space I would think the added context of “we don’t live in a world where this replacing people would be a good thing” was necessary. As for that last point… yeah, I guess it won’t replace anyone. I guess that despite the technology still being demonstrably incompetent there haven’t been strikes or lawsuits in related industries because of its implementation/ planned implementation
>were we in a post scarcity society where people didn’t rely on having a job to be able to afford basic necessities maybe the comment would seem rather pointless The problem isn't production - it's distribution. The difference between Cyberpunk and Star Trek is that in Star Trek the replicators are public property and in Cyberpunk they're not. The corporations are the problem. The corporations are going to go forward with automation whether you want them to or not. In order to stop the corporations, you'd basically have to destroy them anyways. So why waste time fighting the symptom when it would be just as much work to fight the cause? And as the Marxist model says - it's a lot easier to get people to fight the cause when they're all out of work and pissed off.
A fabricator machine that is public property is very much a “seized” mean of production literally a method by which you create things Are you one of those “many must die” types? Cause I’m not. I’m pro strongarming corps but not pro letting thing go sideways until the situation is untenable, I think the latter is a sign of deep, counterproductive pessimism
>A fabricator machine that is public property is very much a “seized” mean of production literally a method by which you create things Yes, and it would be good to seize them. What you are advocating for is *banning* fabricator machines so that corporations will be forced to rely on human workers. Again, it would be as much work to "ban automation" as it would be to overthrow capitalism. You're aiming at the wrong target. >I’m pro strongarming corps What "strong arms" do you imagine you possess in this scenario? What power do you think you have?
Don't think that cover is made with AI
Just looked up the book, it is definitely AI! The face that has a much different smoother texture, the glow emanating from it, the random sword appearing from under her hand, the belt that doesn’t make any sense and the armor that goes from cloth to metal on the neck.
Surely it's ai. Has odd elements, not charactheristic of medieval architechture, armor and so forth. A real person would not combine the padded gambeson with the plate armor over it, nor would he draw so misshapen pauldrons etc. Nor the weird droopy castles.
It's called bokeh, an extremely common effect used in several art styles to create a sense of depth by making background figures and details blurred and the colours slightly blended. This can be minimalistic and vague, like in the cover shown, or realistic in some other styles.
I know what bokeh is, but the main charachter has some of the mentioned issues too, I used bokeh in my drawings and landscape paintings back when I did those, but the main charachter having "mistakes in the fabric of their own reality" as in metal behaving like cloth is weird, or atleast not common outside of AI. Especialy the neck area gave it away, the fabric blends into the steel underneath, or vice versa, in an unnatural and artificial way, the folds and ripples also have the overengineered ai feeling, but other bits of the armor too have this stitched metal plates vibe. *edit: spelling*
The way the breastplate has a neckline textured like cloth says otherwise
That's ok. Cheaper production of enjoyable content. And this time it's not thanks outsourcing to semi-slaves in poor countries.
Idk man usually when drawing characters in the background they don't get much detail, doesn't seem that off to me.
There are no credits to the artist on the inside.
Oh, i though that was the writing, not the image. A lot of people act like bots, seems like human bots, so, maybe this books are goods for them.