System Shock publisher faces anger for using AI-generated artwork, says it wanted to start...

midian182

Posts: 9,742   +121
Staff member
A hot potato: Content created by generative AI is starting to feel like NFTs did at their height: companies love it, but a lot of consumers don't. The latest example of this comes from Prime Matter, publisher of the upcoming System Shock remake, which recently used Midjourney to create a picture of antagonist Shodan and shared it on social media, much to the annoyance of many fans.

A Twitter post on the official System Shock remake account included an image of Shodan created by Midjourney, along with the words "designed by an immortal machine for an immortal machine."

While the intention might have been to get an AI to create an AI, the reaction to the post has mostly been negative. "Pay an artist. I don't want to see slop made from a plagiarism machine," wrote one. "I gotta join the others and say I hate AI art being used by corporations. Pay an artist to make something like this or don't waste my time, please," wrote another.

Nightdive, the developer of System Shock, has confirmed that the post was entirely Prime Matter's doing. "The Twitter account is not controlled by Nightdive; the original and subsequent posts were made by Prime Matter," Nightdive director of business development Larry Kuperman told PC Gamer. "These statements do not reflect Nightdive's values nor are they accurate in terms of the development of System Shock. To be clear, no AI generated art was used in the development of System Shock."

The publisher responded to the negativity with another tweet claiming the original post was just intended to start a conversation. "An AI using AI to imagine what AI would look like in a physical form; doesn't get more meta than that… which was the entire point of starting the conversation."

In a subsequent tweet, Prime Matter referred to Geoffrey Hinton, often referred to as the Godfather of AI, who this week left Google to warn about the dangers of companies taking advantage of more powerful AI systems. "Look at how it [AI] was five years ago and how it is now," Hinton said. "Take the difference and propagate it forwards. That's scary."

Despite the outcry, Prime Matter finished with a tweet confirming it will continue to use AI to create other pieces, including artwork, and in other areas, but never at the expense of using skilled people or their creative talents, apparently.

For all the excitement around generative AIs, the job losses they are inflicting (or will inflict) on Dropbox, IBM, and others aren't generating much love. Most workers are against an AI deciding who in a company is fired, hired, or promoted, and a recent study showed that people would rather talk to a human than an AI. Using image-generating AI is also receiving pushback from those who say it is costing artists jobs and is merely plagiarizing other work.

Permalink to story.

 
Dropbox isn't replacing people with AI, they are replacing storage-related programmers with AI programmers.

That is a huge difference.
 
Large company HR departments have been using keyword searching resume programs make hiring decisions for YEARS they just didn't call it AI.

If you want a human to hire you, apply to smaller companies.
 
Companies want what most people want and that is easy money. But ethics is debatable. NFTs record the ownership of a specific garbage, because that`s what 99.9% of that "art" is on a blockchain, without even preserving the content and the rest is hype and shady businesses. Companies embraced that, because they could sell crap for maximum profits and even then, ownership would have been in name only, because anyone could replicate it. So, while I consider NFTs as basically fraud, AI generating images tech is not even remotely close, considering many artists just copy bits and pieces from others to create an unique style. I don`t feel like I`ve been cheated if an AI could generate an amazing image, just like if an artist were to be "inspired" from other peoples work. Come to think of it, it will even drive the NFT market into the ground, because of AI being able to do what most artists do, ownership of an unique garbage will have even less meaning as AI could make a gazillion of that.
 
If they want to use a tool to create abstract art, who cares. Will still need artists to do anything more specific...
 
"Pay an artist" is not art criticism, it sounds more like a labor action.

Video game development will remain an artistic endeavor for the foreseeable future no matter how much AI assist it gets. The exact roles on a dev team and how they spend their hours may evolve a bit.

Taking everything into account including how AI will eventually reduce costs everywhere else too, we're likely all better off in the long run, although as usual there's the transition period to navigate.
 
Playing this forward a bit, if AI CAN replace human jobs, it will. Companies looOOOOoovve to get rid of humans, as the cost of people is HUGE!!! So, the real question is, can AI replace trash collectors?

When AI starts to replace CEO's, THAT is when the AI's days will be numbered.
 
If they want to use a tool to create abstract art, who cares. Will still need artists to do anything more specific...

It depends. Assuming you can teach your AI using every piece of photo and art available to a human to look at online, then you can teach your AI to create such wide range of content that it would be as good or better than a lot of people can create. Better yet, it will be fast and cheap.
 
AI-generated art, code or what have you is all good it's just progress. No different than when they changed street lights from gas to electricity and all those street lamp lighters were out of a job. Progress puts people out of work until they find their new nitch, it's tough but it's life.
 
Back