pesets

@4nonirik Thank you, i appreciate the kind words a lot!

@pestsowe Nicely drawn!(─‿‿─)👍🏻~❤️

@Matheus58323427 XD

@Zielona_literka thank you! i'm glad you liked it

@pestsowe Instant follow👀

thank you to all for the love and support!! roses

just to embarass myself here are stages: 1. the initial sketch (terrifying and painful to look at) 2. reiteration in krita 3. coloring (hands out the window) 4. details and finishing touches thanks to @igorczas1 for critique and ideas (check this person out also)

I'm mindblown by statistic this post has gotten It completely exploded my page and overnight i went from 25 to 200+ followers Thank you all for engagement, likes and reposts! I appreciate it a lot! I've got some ideas on what to do after my current commission queue so stay tuned!

total lie

Drawpill Highlights June 1. literallí me (drawer) 2. violet person 3. saphire person 4. average school experience (thank god i finished it years ago)

@igorczas1 another hit

shower

@nozomupilled To call yourself an artist means to call your stuff art which might be considered pretentious and you can just plainly announce the mere fact that you’re drawing but not all the time, so it’s sometimes you draw

artists when they don’t know what to put as a bio

@YellingAtNerds2 @Lunaflorisi Okay, beating around the bush, so wrapping it up. Kid drawing a pikachu should be jailed. No nuance or context for use or consent is needed. Thank you for participation in this discussion

@pestsowe @Lunaflorisi Consent is not contextual. You do not have the right to use their characters. They said you don't. You use them anyway. You are a thief from your own logic.

But others use A.I and for the pro artist and experts or good in drawing are not using A.I they learned it

@YellingAtNerds2 @Lunaflorisi pathetic adhominem; person who draws pikachu is not a stealer, if the same person sells it then it is a violation. consent is contextual and intricate. and you skipped it completely by calling both 'use' and me a rapist drawing = rape, gotcha

@pestsowe @Lunaflorisi It's not vauge. You're stealing and you're a thief.

@YellingAtNerds2 @Lunaflorisi My stance is clear as day, you can proceed to cope with by not understanding what i mean and burying it into vague formal semantics glossing over important details

It's not vauge. Usewithoutconsent is very specific. You do not have consent to use it. This is very very simple. For anyone who isn't a rapist at least. Even then with copyright and trademark you are denied use by default and need affirmative consent. Thats why sites request writen permisson vs asking every owner if every person can use it individually. But even in your attempt to try in worm your way out of it. You've moved again from it being about consent. The formula is consistent. Are all three theft?

@YellingAtNerds2 @Lunaflorisi exactly, you are likely to 'use' within certain boundaries. In your formula the term use is vague, so eating using a fork and stabbing a fork in a persons neck is the same. Nobody explicitly told you its bad, however they don't consent to this specific use

@pestsowe @Lunaflorisi how would these be the same? you're most likely expected to use the pens to do your job? but both would be violations if told explicitly not to use those pens. But can you actually address the formula I just said? do you think all three would be a violation?

@YellingAtNerds2 @Lunaflorisi so when a person uses a ballpoint pen at a workplace its the same as me taking the someone elses patent and manufacturing and selling products of of it?

so this is simple to show if you actually care or not. "if AI training uses artists´ work without their consent then it is a violation." so UseWithoutConsent(X, artistsWork) → Violation(X) X = AI, person, company, studio, school, platform etc so if consent is what matters, all three of these are true UseWithoutConsent(AI, artistsWork) → Violation(AI) UseWithoutConsent(Person, artistsWork) → Violation(Person) UseWithoutConsent(Company, artistsWork) → Violation(Company) The only thing changing is the content of the X var. if you disagree with any of this it means UseWithoutConsent is not the important thing, and you don't care about consent. you care about who does the violation.

@YellingAtNerds2 @Lunaflorisi Yes, it does matter. And yes, if AI training uses artists´ work without their consent then it is a violation. If an artist or company is against their work being used in AI generation then its a violation.

it doesn't matter if you claim it or not. none of that are things you care about. we know that's true because if we say the AI does it then you'll say it's not the point. people don't want to be raped murdered or stabbed and it happens? these studios hate pirates it that's still a thriving industry. you put all the weight on the victims instead of the attacker. you would 100% ask what I was wearing.

@YellingAtNerds2 @Lunaflorisi compare rape with drawing bro Drawing a popular character without claiming it is not considered stealing. Otherwise fanart simply would not exist. Owners of character can manage their character usage. If it was a crime an appropriate action would have taken place

if a multi billion dollar company can't sue hundreds of thousands of people it's okay to steal from them? do the math on 300k x 100K people. then realize you're saying, so as long as a person can't defend themselves, the crime is okay to commit against them. So If I can't stop a man from raping me, it's A OK?

@YellingAtNerds2 @Lunaflorisi basic economy: if a huge multibillion company can't afford to sue an artist means this art is not stealing against their wishes generative ai, however, was trained on art of real artists who spent countless hours working on it, and was done against their wish

artist stealing you mean. they are being sued constantly. it's also more expensive for someone to sue. you're expecting companies to spend 300k at least per instance. there is no legal tema large enough. you're essentially saying as long as the theft and looting is large enough is okay. and guess what AI would be good with doing?