>>7257225>>7257481>>7257860Currently, the person generating prompts needs a combination of luck (i.e. seeds) and skill (getting it to generate an image close to the desired prompt).
By its nature, most of what is created will be sub-optimal. This is where the human element needs to cull the bad results instead of posting them online without restraint. If AI content is not filtered, the pool of samples could become contaminated by poorly generated imagery.
AI is becoming more powerful by the day. Increased sample sizes, advancing technology, and other factors will push it beyond what we think possible.
It will be interesting to see how it may become capable of generating new art styles, and more accurate at creating new imagery in specific styles.
This raises the moral conundrum of sampling artists' work without permission, while claiming fair use. To my knowledge, this is still untested in court, and future litigation could affect the development of AI.
The technology has some legitimate use cases in my opinion, such as generating images in the style of artists that do not do commissions, no longer create art, or are deceased. Everybody will draw the line somewhere different, which is why we need to have discussions on the benefits against the detriments.
