You could have displayed someone’s already existing art and credited them with a link to their social profile, though.
No, because that's boring and not creative.
You do realize you're stating that in defense of generic, machine-generated imagery, right?
I didn't advertise Stable Diffusion. I posted about a cool new automation I developed.
If it was just "cool new automation" we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I wouldn't and can't pay artists to make banners for a random community.
You could have displayed someone's already existing art and credited them with a link to their social profile, though.
Ergo I'm not taking anything away.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
Likewise someone who can't pay for media, is not stealing money from the artists mouths
Again, the marginal cost of distribution approaches zero, but the cost of production does not. Artists should be paid to do work, not for restricting access to work they have already done.
the point is being creative myself!
Then do that instead.
I assure you, the cost of reproducing downloading a single mp3 greater than the cost to generate a single image
The average image generator burns between 10 and 30 watt-hours per image. Downloading 4mb from a server costs about 0.000026 watt-hours. (Sources: https://mcengkuru.medium.com/the-hidden-cost-of-ai-images-how-generating-one-could-power-your-fridge-for-hours-174c95c43db8 https://www.devsustainability.com/p/approaches-to-calculating-network-website-energy-and-carbon )
the potential waste of such an action is not a concern.
Sure seems like it is a concern since the energy usage of datacenters is expected to double in the next year and a half.
So? I also use a PC with components developed by AMD,Nvidia and half a dozen other corporatiosn. I live in a house developed by corporations. I eat food developed by corporations.
And if you posted about those here in the piracy sub you'd get the same complaints.
People here who care about art don't want to see it replaced with generative genericness any more than they want it locked up behind a corporate paywall. Media pirates should be giving artists exposure, distribution, and donations, not reasons to switch careers.
My random banners don't stop anyone from opportunities to practice their art.
Exactly, you never intended to commission an artist because you think so-called "AI art" is good enough to replace them.
Do you also go and complain about copyright violations?
Of course not, the marginal cost of duplicating an existing digital work is trivial. The cost of producing work is not, which is why freelance artists work on commission.
your comment "waste" is below trivial. Just like my genAI images.
If the images are so trivial then why spend so much effort defending them?
You clearly care about this, just not enough to pay an artist for custom work or even to copy something an artist already created.
My computer is far more wasteful in a single session of video gaming. Or are you railing against those too?
Again, of course not. You're a person and not a machine designed to replace paid work with a generic plagirism laundromat.
Electricity spent to provide humans with a comfortable working environment isn't wasted. Electricity spent to deprive an artist of the opportunity to practice their craft absolutely is.
Facebook implements things [...] for their own profit and empowerements at the cost of the whole society.
The same could be said for the electricity you wasted because you didn't want to make your own banner.
Practically, if a website I use implements features that I don't want to see, then I am effected. I quit Facebook for similar reasons 15 years ago.
I do automation for a living, I'm well aware that computer engineering can be a creative process, but it is not an artistic one.
I don't like seeing visual art automated.
I don't know what's in your computer, but some high-end graphics cards can pull more than 300W at full load all on their own. 400W total power output seems a pretty conservative estimate to me.