rpg

4373 readers

2 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

Do not distribute pirate content
Do not incite arguments/flamewars/gatekeeping.
Do not submit video game content unless the game is based on a tabletop RPG property and is newsworthy.
Image and video links MUST be TTRPG related and should be shared as self posts/text with context or discussion unless they fall under our specific case rules.
Do not submit posts looking for players, groups or games.
Do not advertise for livestreams
Limit Self-promotions. Active members may promote their own content once per week. Crowdfunding posts are limited to one announcement and one reminder across all users.
Comment respectfully. Refrain from personal attacks and discriminatory (racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc.) comments. Comments deemed abusive may be removed by moderators.
No Zak S content.
Off-Topic: Book trade, Boardgames, wargames, video games are generally off-topic.
No AI-generated content. Discussion of AI generation pertaining to RPGs is explicitly allowed.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Avogadro@ttrpg.network

sirblastalot@ttrpg.network

TripHammer@ttrpg.network

Primarch@ttrpg.network

BrentTaylor@ttrpg.network

101

Thoughts on preemptively banning Gen-AI? (ttrpg.network)

submitted 2 months ago by sirblastalot@ttrpg.network to c/rpg@ttrpg.network

87 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I've been reading about the user revolt on the Twin Peaks subreddit calling for a ban on AI art. As best I can tell we don't really have people posting AI stuff here yet, but I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to ban it before it becomes a problem. I'm soliciting feedback from y'all on this, please let me know what you prefer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

'People say it's a tool, but they use it for the thing it does!' ... what?

How else could you use generative AI, except to generate a thing for you?

Most things that could be commissioned - aren't. The money is never spent. The money isn't real. No one is robbed when a robot does the thing instead, because what it's instead of, is the thing not happening.

You cannot kvetch about this replacing all artists forever and still insist it's a flash in the pan. The tech works. You can run it on your own computer, to-day. It plainly serves a desirable purpose. That alone makes comparisons to NFTs as spurious as those dolts insisting 'people doubted the internet.'

Any visions of this blowing over should've vanished when it became a porn faucet.

[–] pteryx@dice.camp 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The kinds of people who find replacing artists a "desirable purpose" do not belong in a creative community.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Having art is desirable. Only self-professed haters think it's replacing much of anything, versus what I just fucking explained - it makes things that otherwise would not get made. No money is lost if there is no money.

[–] pteryx@dice.camp 3 points 2 months ago

Only self-professed haters? Tell that to the corporations firing people to replace them with "AI" that can't actually do their jobs correctly.

load more comments (1 replies)