• brucethemoose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    I mean, even the crappiest advertising literally makes Big Tech trillions of dollars, so unfortunately I don’t think is reality.

  • frog_brawler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Haha… I started an LLC on Wednesday. I had AI generate a (temporary) company logo for me.

    Yesterday, I sent that logo to a real artist and asked them to re-make and improve it because I’m not planning on using AI shit.

    If I can afford to spend $75 on a side hustle, any real company that I’m buying shit from better at least be doing the same.

    • Kühlschrank@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      3 months ago

      As a graphic designer I… don’t hate that AI exists for that use case. It’s admittedly a pretty nice way to iterate on rough ideas for me and my clients so we can get to a common understanding. But it’s only going to get them 50% of the way there as it is now and I hope that people continue to recognize that.

    • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      Except, you literally are describing using AI to save yourself the cost of several rounds of revisions with a graphic designer…

      • Katana314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s a very interesting quandary. I know most workers usually hate the revision portion of the process where they’re throwing away their work, but they’re also getting billable hours for it.

        So if an artist genuinely has future clients lined up, and is only starved for time, I imagine they’d want the path that gives them the most finalized pieces they can share. But it would have to be case by case.

      • frog_brawler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        … and then paying a designer…

        It’s a side business with $0 in income. There’s no fucking way I’m going more than 2 rounds on revisions as it is. If it’s more than that, I’ll do the art myself and it’ll be shit; but better than nothing. Simply not worth it at $0 income. If AI wasn’t an option to get things started, the artist wouldn’t be getting paid at all because I wouldn’t be hiring an artist.

        • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t think there’s anything actually wrong with what you did, but I also don’t think you should kid yourself that you didn’t use AI shit for your business just because it wasn’t the final logo.

          • frog_brawler@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            That’s absurd.

            There’s a possibility that the artist might come back to me with something different from the AI mockup. We don’t know that yet. I only told them that the logo needs three specific components.

            If I ask an AI to give me a premise for a book, write the entire book, delete it before anyone ever reads it, decide on a different premise and write a different book, did I use AI to write the book that people are going to read? No.

            • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              So like you didn’t find it useful at all for your business? Like not even to help you clarify your vision to a graphic designer?

              • frog_brawler@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                I’m not sure yet… maybe a bit, maybe not. When I sent the AI markup over, the exact words I used were, “I’m going to attach the starter logo that AI made for me so that you can reference it. I’d give the AI logo a rating of about a 4 out of 10…”

                Pretty much told the artist that the AI art sucks. If using the AI to tell the artist “don’t do this” was efficient, it probably helped a bit and you’d have a point. If the artist just does the same thing the AI did, it wasn’t useful at all but they got $75 out of me anyway.

                • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  People are being very pedantic here. You used AI for the logo in the same way I would use SketchUp for house designs. I still want a professional to do the real thing, but needed something to use to show the professional what I was thinking about having as the final product, since I don’t know how to do real house designs. I don’t see what you did as bad, since you went to a professional for your actual product.

  • x0x7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Actually the more a company spends on advertising the more it’s going to be a cheap scammy product. Have you ever bought anything off TV? I don’t recommend it. $29 minimum for things that should be in a $5 misc bin at Walmart. Why? You are paying for their marketing.

  • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hard to differentiate

    Better to assume they are cheaping out on the product or overcharging you if they can afford to advertise

  • KuroiKaze@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    3 months ago

    Trust me, you’re going to have zero ability to discern what is AI generated in less than two years.

    • biggerbogboy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not too sure about that, that might be the case but currently, they would need much more training to not mess up facial features, to make images truly lifelike and to follow prompt instructions better.

      I’ve used dalle a fair bit and I came to the conclusion that you will never get a truly accurate representation of a person, such as hair on a bald persons head, stubble turning into a moustache, tons of wrinkles for no reason, etc. It only seems good at generating cartoon characters, even then though, there are still inaccuracies.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Their only solution is “throw more data at it!”

      The technology definitely can get better, but you shouldn’t assume it will. Just look at the people developing it.

      • LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        That’s not true. DeepSeek showed that smart people are working on it that are not entirely motivated by just making a cheaper way to advertise. I think the wests a implementation of AI is so horribly corrupted by capitalist incentives. I think we’ll continue to see advancements out of China and Asia. It’s definitely not “just throw more data at it”.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          DeepSeek showed that the Western “just throw more data at it” nonsense is a failed strategy, and certainly China is going to continue developing this technology further. Their approach is much smarter, they build different models for different problems instead of trying to build a general purpose model that can do everything at once. Then DeepSeek can switch between different models to solve different problems, instead of trying to make every problem conform to their one general purpose model.

          Let me clarify - I don’t think any advancement of this technology is going to come out of Silicon Valley. They’re all trying to build the Homer Car.

  • Ulrich@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hate to tell you but you’re the only one thinking that. The average consumer could not care less.

    • Gigasser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      The average consumer cares about the quality of a product as well as how affordable it is. AI…I dunno, it doesn’t really make a product “look” better if it’s ads or packaging or what have you, have a “meh” AI art vibe. AI art, because of its ease of generation, is vast becoming a sign of genericness.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        The average consumer couldn’t pick out AI generated marketing anyway

        • Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          Depends on your target demographic I guess. Younger consumers will notice, older ones not so much.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Don’t know what that link is but it’s staying blue unless you want to tell me what’s behind it.

        • ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.socialOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          It is a link to an academic journal.

          Consequently, this study suggests that using the term “Artificial Intelligence” in marketing campaigns and product descriptions may negatively impact consumer demand.

          • Ulrich@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            The OP is not about using AI terminology in marketing campaigns, it’s about using AI imagery.

      • FlihpFlorp@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        In my anecdotal experience which is of course the most solid and accurate (/s) people I’ve talked to within my circles do care just not enough to do anything. Pretty much along the lines, “of AI, weird, anyways”

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s not hyperbole. I said “the average consumer”, not “all consumers”.

  • Squorlple@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    3 months ago

    I saw a job listing the other day for an “AI Advocate” (I don’t remember the specific job title). Basically the job was to promote the use of AI products to other companies. It got me thinking that their AI replacements for humans must not be very good if they need a human to promote them, otherwise the AI would be able to successfully sell itself.

    • jsomae@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      This could be said of any other job though. “I guess AI isn’t that good, because it can’t replace ______.” Why would you assume that AI advocate should be especially easy for AI?

      • Squorlple@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        3 months ago

        AI chats are known for their overconfident persuasiveness, especially when incorrect. IIRC the job was pretty much just yapping that exact type of rhetoric.

        • jsomae@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 months ago

          In general, salespeople are still employed, as far as I know. AI hasn’t been able to replace them. Perhaps AI is too gullible to the client.

  • theywilleatthestars@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hey, if you don’t have much of a budget that’s fine. What AI indicates is that your thing is either too shitty to photograph, or that you don’t much care what it looks like.

  • C1pher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I mean it IS normalized. They don’t care to put effort into marketing and proper product representation. What does that speak about them, as a company?

  • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.caBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    47
    ·
    3 months ago

    This art made by an artist wearing clothes made by machines because they didn’t want to pay a tailor.

    • A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      What the fuck kind of garbage argument is that, gtfo here

      Everyone laugh at this person. Heckle and pursue them all their days.

        • ThisSeriesIsFalse@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Most people buying clothes aren’t looking for high fashion, they’re looking for something comfortable in a colour that they like. Those who are looking for fashion tend to get clothes that are originally designed and made by a tailor, and then copied so others may wear them, importantly with the consent of the tailor. These are akin to YCH commissions, since the artist/tailor gets paid for the design.

          This doesn’t apply to AI image generation, as the artists are almost never asked for their consent before their work gets copied and cloned a million times over. Nor do they get any sort of compensation for their stolen work.

          • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.caBanned from community
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Most people buying art aren’t looking for high art, they’re looking for something that they enjoy looking at. Those who are into art are in no way restricted from buying non-AI art if they want to. The whole argument about intellectual theft is bullshit, every single fashion designer steals ideas and inspiration from elsewhere.

            • A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              See, here’s my problem. I took some time to think it over.

              You don’t actually care about art, here. You care about what you do. Which, I’m guessing, involves tailoring.

              You brought tailoring into this out of nowhere. Nobody was talking about it but you had to.

              This conversation was about AI art and the consequences of it on people trying to make a living, and your retort was sewing machines took jobs too.

              You really wanna stand by that? Is that the hill you wanna die on?

              • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.caBanned from community
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                I automate business processes for a living, not using AI (yet). I literally improve productivity for a living.

                Making an argument about the consequences of people trying to make a living was exactly my point, but you fail to realize that that argument has been made literally hundreds of times over the last two centuries as new technologies have come out that cause concerns for workers, Including for fabric and sewing.

                The first paragraph of the Wikipedia article on Luddites:

                The Luddites were members of a 19th-century movement of English textile workers who opposed the use of certain types of automated machinery due to concerns relating to worker pay and output quality. They often destroyed the machines in organised raids.[1][2] Members of the group referred to themselves as Luddites, self-described followers of “Ned Ludd”, a legendary weaver whose name was used as a pseudonym in threatening letters to mill owners and government officials.[3]

                You’re just Ludd-AI-tes

          • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Fun fact, fashion is one of the few artistic media that has literally never been protected by copyright law and has literally always been filled with people having their work copied and cloned millions of times over with no recourse. And this isn’t even considered to be a bad thing. This is just how fashion works as an art.

    • insomniac_lemon@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      ME, doing shitty sewing on my own old clothes: “You know, I’m something of a tailor myself”

      • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        You know it’s funny is that there’s entire artistic movements (even in fashion itself) all about challenging the idea that art is inherently a demonstration of technical ability, and that such a world view is actually incredibly philosophically shallow, limited, and frankly incoherent when you’re trying to actually decide what is and isn’t art. For instance, Johnny Rotten safety pinning his sleeves onto his shirt is a far more interesting tailor than anyone at a high-end fashion boutique even if he literally doesn’t know how to sew.

      • CrayonDevourer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I’m one of the few dudes who didn’t think sewing was for women back in school, and let me tell you - that shit is worth having as a skill. Legitimately being able to tailor your own clothing is legit.

        However, I’m not gonna dump on people without the skill to do it - just like I won’t dump on people who use modern tools to create graphics.

  • jqubed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    3 months ago

    If I hear an “AI” voiceover I have the same reaction. Definitely won’t be buying anything from Dr. Squatch.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I absolutely hate computer generated voices, especially when I have to listen to them for a long time. An AI narrated video? Nope.