Dear Linux community,
In these unpredictable and often challenging times, I feel it’s more important than ever to pause and share heartfelt wishes. Merry Christmas to each and every one of you!
Let this holiday season be a moment of peace, where you can step back, breathe, and find some calm amidst the chaos. Take the opportunity to reconnect, reflect, and perhaps even find inspiration for the year ahead.
May your days be filled with joy, your systems stay secure, and your kernels remain stable. Here’s to a festive season full of positivity and open-source spirit!
Warm wishes,
Your fellow penguin at heart.
P.S.: I had very little time, so the whole thing, was AI accelerated! Please forgive me :-)
OP, please don’t post any more AI slop so I don’t get flooded with reports from users.
Stop using AI to generate images. It’s obvious, it looks awful, and companies are genuinely looking to use it to stop having to pay human artists.
AI slop, reported.
Nice idea but yeah, Ai stuff is a bit tacky. :)
Reminds me of “Ahh bro I’m offended by christmas its evil, take the santa cap off vlc”
Nothing says “Linux” more than paying a megacorp to steal the hard work of artists…
Thank you!
It’s chrism
Ai slop
I was having a much better Christmas before I saw this AI slop on my feed.
merry Christmas friends ❤️🎄
Finally AI slop. Linux is now a fully grown corpo and therefore the year of Linux desktop is here
TempleOS is the only OS corpos won’t touch, It’s protected by a holy shield!
King Terry the Terrible is watching everyone that uses TempleOS and will execute anyone who misuses it with an A10 gun, the fist of God.
In these corporate times we can stay free, share the code, and help our neighbors. Together we can share the joyous spirit of friendship, hacking, and arguing endlessly over which distro is best. In conclusion, Linux provides us with many good things, and should be celebrated.
So, the art is obviously AI slop, but is the post body also AI? Because it reads really weird.
The very generic message makes me inclined to think so too
Your AI acceleration makes the whole thing a lot less genuine.
yawn. So long as he used a local FOSS model there’s nothing wrong with AI.
The idea that AI is fine is anti-human
This is irrational and reactionary.
It’s a take based on an appeal to nature and noble savage fallacies propogated by neolibs and marketing teams making the “organic” play with their products.
AI is just a tool, it’s misuse by Corpos is something we all agree is bad, but by themselves tools do not make you or anyone else less human, nor do glasses make those of poor sight less human etc.
How the absurdity of making such a statement on a sub defined by an identity tied to a computer operating system doesn’t make you re-think that claim is beyond me.
Be better.
Edit: and no it’s pointless to argue, nobody changes their minds, I’m just posting stuff like this so assholes I would like to have blocked come out and make themselves known as they always do.
Your 2nd paragraph is just a lie made up in your own head.
AI isn’t a tool, a brush is. A brush or any other tool lets humans create. an IGA (image generation algorithm) often mislabelled as AI doesn’t let you create instead it TAKES what other humans already had created and shushes it together without regard for any artistic expression, since as a computer program, it’s incapable of art. It’s plagiarism with extra steps.
Ai as a thing only exists today because it’s in the interest of corporations to replace humans with machines in order to funnel more wealth to the owning class.
However in a society with class equality AI would be worthless. It cannot “make” anything without someone else already having made that thing first, it’s a waste of time and an erosion to society, a cancer.
You will never change because simply put, you’re not smart enough to. You’re incapable of understanding how and why you’re wrong because you lack the intelligence, education and desire to grow.
It being proprietary isnt in the top 5 of the list of my problems with AI
Thanks for letting me know you’re a moron. Blocked.
edit: Please be nice to each other! :(
Lots of downvotes in this reply chain. Not to be a “I don’t wanna be either side” kinda guy but AI isn’t all bad and isn’t all good either. (Greys!)
Merry Christmasing should be a genuine hug. Even if this was made by a homegrown open-weight open-dataset inference model, it’s nearly 100% low-effort generated – holidays need the human aspect, no? Covering yourself up too much in AI takes away from the humanness with corporate diction, and people need evidence of risktaking genuineness nowadays.
On the other hand, AI is definitely useful… but elsewhere. It’s not strictly anti-human even if conglomerates are using it that way, which I think you agree on. Wading through HOA using local NLP setups is human. Looking through a Mandarin thread when typical translation sucks, is human.
But there are domains for its use and there is ethical stuff to work on. This post just doesn’t fit the domain too well, as others agree…
eh, i don’t see it as any different than most of the cards in a store, it’s all incredibly low effort and cringy, yet no one seems to give a shit about that.
That’s an interesting perspective actually
Maybe it’s because of who’s giving them? If my little cousin gave me an AI Christmas card, I’d be happier than if a stranger gave me one on the street. (Though I’d feel bummed if they didn’t even marker in a single custom sentence)
i.e. higher standards of creativity/effort from a stranger than from a family member.
Also the stranger isn’t stuffing a tenner in the card lmao
i just kinda feel eh about them as a concept, it’s just a piece of paper with an image on it where the sum total involvement from the giver is that they selected the card, and even that is almost never something that took more than 20 seconds.
It’s a worse version of postcards, which usually have some actually interesting art on them (or a photo) and is relevant to a journey they made.
You could have not using ai slop to illustrate your post.
Could they? What if they don’t have the skills to draw it themselves?
So because they don’t have the skills they should steal and claim it as their own?
Adding an image to your post is not mandatory.
I’d have taken a crayon drawing instead.
a mspaint black and white trackpad drawing would be better than this shit
There’s something called a “stock image” and “editing tux onto the stock image”
I disagree with this sentiment; I’m inclined to believe that AI has actually lowered the bar for meaning.
Before AI, typically only skilled artists drew pictures for the web. But now that AI is making art that’s less meaningful than crayon pictures, there’s the growing sentiment of
I’d rather see a crayon picture than AI slop.
which could actually mean more people have the ability to go on and artify.
Of course this is anecdotal; it’s the reason I started drawing again :)
This is selective memory at best. There’s a lot of so-called art by real humans and text wishes that are way way worse than what OpenAI’s algorithms produce.
I’m not sure I agree but I’m happy to discuss! :)
Why are you calling my statement “selective memory” (am I intentionally excluding something?), and what do you mean by “way worse”? Do you consider unskilled art as not art at all (i.e. “so-called”)?
What I was trying to say, is that on social media, skilled artists formerly dominated attention (likes, upvotes) because viewers wanted well-constructed, pleasing-to-the-eye artwork. I wasn’t trying to say that they were the only art posters (sorry for my wording!). Continuing, now that AI is in the arena, “technically-decent” art is no longer the lower bound for pleasurable-to-see – now, viewers are more partial to knowing that a human was vulnerable when they expressed themselves with art.
It’s an intensification of internet-ugly aesthetic, which Douglas (2014) called "an imposition of messy humanity upon an online world of smooth gradients, blemish correcting Photoshop, and AutoCorrect” (p. 314). Now, online, handmaking art at all is a declaration of humanity, because you could corporately fake something full-colored and intricate, but arguably soulless, with lower effort.
Of course, I’ll try to take it from your perspective. I’ve seen really bad human art (I like art!), and I’ve seen less-artifacted AI art (have you ever seen Even_Adder’s generations on lemmy.dbzer0? they don’t have the overshading issue at all). Of course, some may disagree that the latter is art (is art only human expression?), but supposing I do consider the latter art, my point still stands – viewers are more on the lookout for genuineness now.
Happy to see what you think!
References
- Douglas, N. (2014). It’s supposed to look like shit: The internet ugly aesthetic. Journal of Visual Culture, 13(3), 314–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470412914544516
Your initial wording made me mistakingly think that your point was in showing that AI made creations worse but before, when humans made it themselves.
Now that I see your real point, I still cannot agree. Your arguing has a false premise of thinking that everyone wants genuine human expression everywhere and eye candy images are no longer enough. Yet proofs of that not being the case are right before your eyes - look at the amount of upvotes on this post. The ones posting comments like
I’d rather see a crayon picture than AI slop.
are a vocal minority. Most people see the good enough image generated by AI and pass on. They never bother to zoom in and look for the artifacts that it has. Most don’t have the time to look for the ChatGPT wording, they read the post diagonally for 10 seconds and move on with their life.
The argument has its roots in the problem of our different social surroundings. Maybe your life is full of people who have the time and energy to enjoy art that is not just looking decent but has a meaning, a message to it. Mine has a lot of people who are overworked and undereducated to play the game of being culturally superior, to look for humane expressions.
Sometimes, technologically decent is enough. For some people, a simple eye candy that your view for a short period of time is enough to improve their mood during a break. It does not erase the point of high art. It does not threaten it. Thus, I find people that come barking at every AI-generated piece of imagery or text or whatever, claiming that posting this is stealing from others, that such posts serve zero purpose, that it’s better to be shown something poorly drawn with crayon, ridiculous and pitiful.
good thing that you can learn skills.
It’s just a sign of carelessness, a shitty drawing would mean more as OP would have put effort into it and willingness to learn a skill. And it’s not just the drawing, the text is AI as well, so OP just wants some free internet points with as little effort
A text post without a picture would achieve the same result just fine, without stealing work from artists and regurgitating it into a soulless, artifact-ridden and generally ugly picture.
