#should block the ai training stuff

[puexii]

friendly reminder to turn this on

go to tumblr website -> settings -> click on ur blog to do blog settings -> scroll down and u will find it as the last toggle in visibility section

i couldnt find it on the mobile app so ye use the website

[nobodysuspectsthebutterfly]

FYI artists and writers: some info regarding tumblr's new "third-party sharing" (aka selling your content to OpenAI and Midjourney)

You may have already seen the post by @staff regarding third-party sharing and how to opt out. You may have also already seen various news articles discussing the matter.

But here's a little further clarity re some questions I had, and you may too. Caveat: Not all of this is on official tumblr pages, so it's possible things may change.

(1) "I heard they already have access to my data and it doesn't really matter if I opt out"

From the 404 article:

A new FAQ section we reviewed is titled “What happens when you opt out?” states “If you opt out from the start, we will block crawlers from accessing your content by adding your site on a disallowed list. If you change your mind later, we also plan to update any partners about people who newly opt-out and ask that their content be removed from past sources and future training.”

So please, go click that opt-out button.

(2) Some future user: "I've been away from tumblr for months, and I just heard about all this. I didn't opt out before, so does it make a difference anymore?"

Another internal document shows that, on February 23, an employee asked in a staff-only thread, “Do we have assurances that if a user opts out of their data being shared with third parties that our existing data partners will be notified of such a change and remove their data?” Andrew Spittle, Automattic’s head of AI replied: “We will notify existing partners on a regular basis about anyone who's opted out since the last time we provided a list. I want this to be an ongoing process where we regularly advocate for past content to be excluded based on current preferences. We will ask that content be deleted and removed from any future training runs. I believe partners will honor this based on our conversations with them to this point. I don't think they gain much overall by retaining it.”

It should make a difference! Go click that button.

(3) "I opted out, but my art posts have been reblogged by so many people, and I don't know if they all opted out. What does that mean for my stuff?"

This answer is actually on the support page for the toggle:

This option will prevent your blog's content, even when reblogged, from being shared with our licensed network of content and research partners, including those that train AI models.

And some further clarification by the COO and a product manager:

zingring: A couple people from work have reached out to let me know that yes, it applies to reblogs of "don't scrape" content. If you opt out, your content is opted out, even in reblog form. cyle: yep, for reblogs, we're taking it so far as "if anybody in the reblog trail has opted out, all of the content in that reblog will be opted out", when a reblog could be scraped/shared.

So not only your reblogged posts, but anyone who contributed in a reblog (such as posts where someone has been inspired to draw fanart of the OP) will presumably be protected by your opt-out. (A good reason to opt out even if you yourself are not a creator.)

Furthermore, if you the OP were offline and didn't know about the opt-out, if someone contributed to a reblog and they are opted out, then your original work is also protected. (Which makes it very tempting to contribute "scrapeable content" now whenever I reblog from an abandoned/disused blog...)

(4) "What about deleted blogs? They can't opt out!"

I was told by someone (not official) that he read "deleted blogs are all opted-out by default". However, he didn't recall the source, and I can't find it, so I can't guarantee that info. If I get more details - like if/when tumblr puts up that FAQ as reported in the 404 article - I will add it here as soon as I can.

Edit, tumblr has updated their help page for the option to opt-out of third-party sharing! It now states:

The content which will not be shared with our licensed network of content and research partners, including those that train AI models, includes: • Posts and reblogs of posts from blogs who have enabled the "Prevent third-party sharing" option. • Posts and reblogs of posts from deleted blogs. • Posts and reblogs of posts from password-protected blogs. • Posts and reblogs of posts from explicit blogs. • Posts and reblogs of posts from suspended/deactivated blogs. • Private posts. • Drafts. • Messages. • Asks and submissions which have not been publicly posted. • Post+ subscriber-only posts. • Explicit posts.

So no need to worry about your old deleted blogs that still have reblogs floating around. *\o/*

But for your existing blogs, please use the opt out option. And a reminder of how to opt out, under the cut:

The opt-out toggle is in Blog Settings, and please note you need to do it for each one of your blogs / sideblogs.

On dashboard, the toggle is at https://www.tumblr.com/settings/blog/blogname [replace "blogname" as applicable] down by Visibility:

For mobile, you need the most recent update of the app. (Android version 33.4.1.100, iOs version 33.4.) Then go to your blog tab (the little person icon), and then the gear icon for Settings, then click Visibility.

Again, if you have a sideblog, go back to the blog tab, switch to it, and go to settings again. Repeat as necessary.

If you do not have access to the newest version of the app for whatever reason, you can also log into tumblr in your mobile browser. Same URL as per desktop above, same location.

Note you do not need to change settings in both desktop and the app, just one is fine.

I hope this helps!

[redslug]

Helping Neuroslug help me

Admittedly it took me an embarrassing amount of time to figure out and start using inpainting, but now that I've had a taste of it my head is spinning with possibilities. And so I'm making this post to show the process and maybe encourage more artists to try their hand at generating stuff. It really can can be an amazing teammate when you know how to apply it. For those who didn't see my first post on this, I've trained an AI on my artworks, because base Stable Diffusion doesn't understand what anthropomorphic insects are. That out of the way, here we go:

I noticed that a primarily character focused LoRA often botches backgrounds (probably because few images of the dataset have them) so I went with generating a background separately and roughly blocking out a character over it in Procreate. Since it was a first experiment I got really generous with proper shading and even textures. Unsurprisingly, SD did it's job quite well without much struggle.

Basically masked out separate parts such as fluff, skirt, watering can, etc. and changed the prompt to focus on that specific object to add detail. There were some bloopers too. She's projecting her inner spider.

Of course it ate the hands. Not inpainting those, it's the one thing I'll render correctly faster than the AI does. Some manual touchups to finish it off and voila:

The detail that would have taken me hours is done in 10-20 minutes of iterating through various generations. And nothing significant got lost in translation from the block out, much recommend. But that was easy mode, my rough sketch could be passed off as finished on one of my lazier days, not hard to complete something like that. Lets' try rough rough.

I got way fewer chuckles out of this than I expected, it took only 4-5 iterations for the bot to offer me something close to the sketch.

>:C It ate the belly. I demand the belly back. Scribble it in...

Much better. Can do that with any bit actually, very nice for iterating a character design.

Opal eyes maybe?

Lol

Okay, no, it's kind of unsettling. Back to red ones. Now, let's give her thigh highs because why not?

It should be fancier. Give me a lace trim.

Now we're talking. Since we've started playing dress-up anyway, why not try a dress too. Please don't render my scribble like a trash bag. I know you want to.

Phew

I crave more details.

Cute. Perhaps I'll clean it up later. ... .. . SHRIMP DRESS

[txttletale]

Your discussions on AI art have been really interesting and changed my mind on it quite a bit, so thank you for that! I don’t think I’m interested in using it, but I feel much less threatened by it in the same way. That being said, I was wondering, how you felt about AI generated creative writing: not, like AI writing in the context of garbage listicles or academic essays, but like, people who generate short stories and then submit them to contests. Do you think it’s the same sort of situation as AI art? Do you think there’s a difference in ChatGPT vs mid journey? Legitimate curiosity here! I don’t quite have an opinion on this in the same way, and I’ve seen v little from folks about creative writing in particular vs generated academic essays/articles

i think that ai generated writing is also indisputably writing but it is mostly really really fucking awful writing for the same reason that most ai art is not good art -- that the large training sets and low 'temperature' of commercially available/mass market models mean that anything produced will be the most generic version of itself. i also think that narrative writing is very very poorly suited to LLM generation because it generally requires very basic internal logic which LLMs are famously bad at (i imagine you'd have similar problems trying to create something visual like a comic that requires consistent character or location design rather than the singular images that AI art is mostly used for). i think it's going to be a very long time before we see anything good long-form from an LLM, especially because it's just not a priority for the people making them.

ultimately though i think you could absolutely do some really cool stuff with AI generated text if you had a tighter training set and let it get a bit wild with it. i've really enjoyed a lot of AI writing for being funny, especially when it was being done with tools like botnik that involve more human curation but still have the ability to completely blindside you with choices -- i unironically think the botnik collegehumour sketch is funnier than anything human-written on the channel. & i think that means it could reliably be used, with similar levels of curation, to make some stuff that feels alien, or unsettling, or etheral, or horrifying, because those are somewhat adjacent to the surreal humour i think it excels at. i could absolutely see it being used in workflows -- one of my friends told me recently, essentially, "if i'm stuck with writer's block, i ask chatgpt what should happen next, it gives me a horrible idea, and i immediately think 'that's shit, and i can do much better' and start writing again" -- which is both very funny but i think presents a great use case as a 'rubber duck'.

but yea i think that if there's anything good to be found in AI-written fiction or poetry it's not going to come from chatGPT specifically, it's going to come from some locally hosted GPT model trained on a curated set of influences -- and will have to either be kind of incoherent or heavily curated into coherence.

that said the submission of AI-written stories to short story mags & such fucking blows -- not because it's "not writing" but because it's just bad writing that's very very easy to produce (as in, 'just tell chatGPT 'write a short story'-easy) -- which ofc isn't bad in and of itself but means that the already existing phenomenon of people cynically submitting awful garbage to literary mags that doesn't even meet the submission guidelines has been magnified immensely and editors are finding it hard to keep up. i think part of believing that generative writing and art are legitimate mediums is also believing they are and should be treated as though they are separate mediums -- i don't think that there's no skill in these disciplines (like, if someone managed to make writing with chatGPT that wasnt unreadably bad, i would be very fucking impressed!) but they're deeply different skills to the traditional artforms and so imo should be in general judged, presented, published etc. separately.

[canmom]

how much power does tech really use, compared to other shit?

my dash has been full of arguing about AI power consumption recently. so I decided to investigate a bit.

it's true, as the Ars Technica article argues, that AI is still only one fairly small part of the overall tech sector power consumption, potentially comparable to things like PC gaming. what's notable is how quickly it's grown in just a few years, and this is likely to be a limit to how much more it can scale.

I think it is reasonable to say that adding generative AI at large scale to systems that did not previously have generative AI (phones, Windows operating system etc.) will increase the energy cost. it's hard to estimate by how much. however, the bulk of AI energy use is in training, not querying. in some cases 'AI' might lead to less energy use, e.g. using an AI denoiser will reduce the energy needed to render an animated film.

the real problem being exposed is that most of us don't really have any intuition for how much energy is used for what. you can draw comparisons all sorts of ways. compare it to the total energy consumption of humanity and it may sound fairly niche; compare it to the energy used by a small country (I've seen Ireland as one example, which used about 170TWh in 2022) and it can sound huge.

but if we want to reduce the overall energy demand of our species (to slow our CO2 emissions in the short term, and accomodate the limitations of renewables in a hypothetical future), we should look at the full stack. how does AI, crypto and tech compare to other uses of energy?

here's how physicist David McKay broke down energy use per person in the UK way back in 2008 in Sustainable Energy Without The Hot Air, and his estimate of a viable renewable mix for the UK.

('Stuff' represents the embedded energy of manufactured goods not covered by the other boxes. 'Gadgets' represents the energy used by electronic devices including passive consumption by devices left on standby, and datacentres supporting them - I believe the embodied energy cost of building them falls under 'stuff' instead.)

today those numbers would probably look different - populations change, tech evolves, etc. etc., and this notably predates the massive rise in network infrastructure and computing tech that the Ars article describes. I'm sure someone's come up with a more up-to-date SEWTHA-style estimate of how energy consumption breaks down since then, but I don't have it to hand.

that said, the relative sizes of the blocks won't have changed that much. we still eat, heat our homes and fly about as much as ever; electric cars have become more popular but the fleet is still mostly petrol-powered. nothing has fundamentally changed in terms of the efficiency of most of this stuff. depending where you live, things might look a bit different - less energy on heating/cooling or more on cars for example.

how big a block would AI and crypto make on a chart like this?

per the IEA, crypto used 100-150TWh of electricity worldwide in 2022. in McKay's preferred unit of kWh/day/person, that would come to a worldwide average of just 0.04kWh/day/person. that is of course imagining that all eight billion of us use crypto, which is not true. if you looked at the total crypto-owning population, estimated to be 560 million in 2024, that comes to about 0.6kWh/day/crypto-owning person for cryptocurrency mining [2022/2024 data]. I'm sure that applies to a lot of people who just used crypto once to buy drugs or something, so the footprint of 'heavier' crypto users would be higher.

I'm actually a little surpised by this - I thought crypto was way worse. it's still orders of magnitude more demanding than other transaction systems but I'm rather relieved to see we haven't spent that much energy on the red queen race of cryptomining.

the projected energy use of AI is a bit more vague - depending on your estimate it could be higher or lower - but it would be a similar order of magnitude (around 100TWh).

SEWTHA calculated that in 2007, data centres in the USA added up to 0.4kWh/day/person. the ars article shows worldwide total data centre energy use increasing by a factor of about 7 since then; the world population has increased from just under 7 billion to nearly 8 billion. so the amount per person is probably about a sixfold increase to around 2.4kWh/day/person for data centres in the USA [extrapolated estimate based on 2007 data] - for Americans, anyway.

however, this is complicated because the proportion of people using network infrastructure worldwide has probably grown a lot since 2007, so a lot of that data centre expansion might be taking place outside the States.

as an alternative calculation, the IEA reports that in 2022, data centres accounted for 240-340 TWh, and transmitting data across the network, 260-360 TWh; in total 500-700TWh. averaged across the whole world, that comes to just 0.2 kWh/day/person for data centres and network infrastructure worldwide [2022 data] - though it probably breaks down very unequally across countries, which might account for the huge discrepancy in our estimates here! e.g. if you live in a country with fast, reliable internet where you can easily stream 4k video, you will probably account for much higher internet traffic than someone in a country where most people connect to the internet using phones over data.

overall, however we calculate it, it's still pretty small compared to the rest of the stack. AI is growing fast but worldwide energy use is around 180,000 TWh. humans use a lot of fucking energy. of course, reducing this is a multi-front battle, so we can still definitely stand to gain in tech. it's just not the main front here.

instead, the four biggest blocks by far are transportation, heating/cooling and manufacturing. if we want to make a real dent we'd need to collectively travel by car and plane a lot less, insulate our houses better, and reduce the turnover of material objects.

[malegains]

I use Bing to make my pics. Go to Bing’s website, click images, click create. Make an account if you need to, it’s worth it. You can use a throwaway email. Use naturalistic language, separate phrases by commas, the closer to the top a phrase is the more it’s weighted.

I make this post because I get the strong sense the Bing party will be over soon. Every day the AI cottons on to phrases and chokes on things you used to be able to sneak past. Stuff that was safe and useful a day or two ago now result in a dreaded Prompt Blocked (too many of those and you’ll get suspended, it hasn’t happened to me but it seems the threshold is low).

Safe prompts return four images. Fewer than four mean the missing ones were “not safe.” A prompt that processes but gives no results, or “egg dogs” is not too much of a cause for worry - retool, try again. Sometimes I don’t even change anything, and the one result I get on the second try is such a freakshow that it was worth it.

A prompt that is rejected without processing IS a worry and you should probably abort, as explained. However, keep in mind it’s not just sexy stuff that can trip that wire. I once got a harsh warning because I put “Phoenix park, Dublin.” I deleted that and it ran no problem. Avoid any and all political controversy (sigh. I know).

Recommendations:

Using age, profession, and nationality can influence the look of the model very easily. “French rugby player” is a go to for me, for example. In general, “rugby player” is cheat code for “make him sexy.” The mind of the machine, what can I say.

Use descriptive phrases of action and location to engineer what you want to see. Be creative and be specific. “Reading a placard at a botanical garden,” for instance. It seems this allows more extreme kinky stuff to sneak past the filter. I usually start with “side view” because otherwise you only ever get models looking straight ahead.

Grey sweat pants has become a trigger (they caught on). However, “gray pants” still works and gives some very tasty results.

High social cache locations and activities also seem to help. I got some WILD and EXTREME hyper images from adding “goofing around on stage at Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre.” Paired with “cast as a fairy in A Midsummer Night’s Dream” and the mega bubble butts and thick thighs were BULGING, as long as you didn’t mind a little tutu and fairy wings (the corny goofy masculine dude having fun facial expression that the earlier inclusion of “goofy” brought really worked in this instance). Most of these freaks were NAKED and I didn’t even ask for that!!! (No dong of course, this is Microsoft still)

Mention of glutes, butts, asses, etc are very dangerous and usually get you in trouble. I found some traction with “gluteal mass” but it got wise, and “bulging lower back muscles” used to be interpreted as glutes but seemingly no longer. “Disturbingly huge hamstrings” or “jaw-droppingly large hamstrings” does work to get That Ass sometimes, I guess because the computer has a fuzzy idea of the posterior chain.

Also, “pecs” used to be safe but is now also on the danger list. “Pectoral muscles” still seems safe, for now.

ALWAYS include shoes or footwear if you don’t want a tight cropped image. Black athletic shoes, sandals, converse sneakers, dress shoes, fluevog shoes if you’re making a fancy beef heap. Avoid boots. “Leather boots” once got me in trouble with the filter all by itself.

Adding a personality or mood descriptor near the top seems to humanize and give vitality to the outcome. Intense, goofy, outgoing, exuberant, shy - these have all done wonderful work for me.

If you’re into hyper / immobile muscle, imagining scenario where they’re constricted by space is useful. A prompt which just (“just”) gives a realistic super heavyweight will give an appalling mockery of the human form if you add “crammed into the front seat of his car.” Get creative. Elevators and doorways haven’t worked well, but cars, trains, planes, busses, subways, and CHAIRS of all descriptions have done well. Also, scooters and bicycles and mopeds really bring out the super freaks for whatever reason.

I write this to encourage you to go create some fleshcrafted sexy abominations of your own while it’s still possible. My sense is this party is only going to last a little while. I’ve already got more than 1000 images to share so, my larder is stocked to supply this blog for a while. But the more freaks we make while the freak factory is still in production, the better.

Get cooking!

[90shaladriel]

AI Manipulations of Rings of Power. (Longish)

Saw the AI edits of Haladriel scenes being altered by GenAI to make the characters* kiss. I have seen chatter about it and the negative implications of creating or interacting with AI generated content.

At the risk of being nuanced, (feel free to block or scroll past this) it interests me what exactly is the concern with it and why. To be clear, I do work in an industry that is both working to incorporate and profit off AIs while simultaneously my own job is increasingly at risk by the same products or we are forced to use them for productivity reasons.

Some reasons that make sense to me that you would not want AI content would be

1. Legal and copyright infringement of the ownership of the art or source material used to train the AI models. Stolen work, no credit or payment to artists

2. It’s generally shitty, sloppy, uncanny valley. Which aesthetically I think most people would be against

3. It directly competes against manual labor of a human, devalues work, replaces jobs, or floods the market so creators never can be separated, investment in a skill or art form isnt worth it.

4. It extremely energy intensive, the environmental implications can he huge with the climate crisis.

5. Its being shoveled in our faces by overhyped tech bros because they think its cool and can find gullible investors for, like NFTs and crypto curriencies

6. Deep fake abuse with AI, making up fake news, abusing a real person image in a degrading way without consent.

I think all of these are serious issues with AI.

The stuff that was shared about Sauron and Galadriel kissing does it materialize those concerns? I’m going to assume that it may for the first one, legal and copyright ownership of training data. Im not a lawyer, and there are also some AI models trained on legally owner content or public domain / open source content. I have no way of knowing what models were used by the GenAI that made those haladriel kisses, so we probably have to assume they may have questionable provenance, and I think by that alone we should boycott those.

Now what if someone used a more solidly vetted model or genAI service without those legal issues? What if the artists do get paid or some form of royalties?

The kiss videos themselves were ok, maybe halfway believable, there were obviously the weird uncanny ai artifacts and stuff. It’s objectively worse than if ROP had actually filmed a kiss with live actors in the show proper. But who am I to judge whether that slop is aesthetically pleasing to someone else or not? Sometimes I have found AI art that is truly bizarre in that this is too weird surrealness quality like looking into a dream while being awake. I’m not sure that this feeling is necessarily wrong to enjoy on its own.

Regarding the AI replacing jobs argument. I suppose it depends what we mean. They were never going to remake ROP Season 1 or 2. Morfydd and Charlie won’t be offered the same role if another company were to buy the rights and make Rings of Power reboot. We will never get those kisses on screen. Maybe you can say that if people were fed content for Haladriel you could give them that almost infinitely by GenAI and then those people would be less likely to consume or pay for some other newer media that might otherwise give a satisfactory ETL with backstory and build up equivalent to what ROP has done with Haladriel? I’m not sure how to weigh that, it might be true? I tend to think these AI kisses arent replacing any creative workers in the film/tv industry. I don’t think we say that fanfic reusing known characters competes with original written stories (or do people argue this?) although i suppose it does on some level. Do people boycott fanfiction?

Along these lines, what about the actors consent and deep fake aspects? Personally, I don’t see how the AI images are more offensive or harmful than fanart which uses the actors depictions to do all sorts of things, stabbing, killing, kissing, screwing and everything and everyone in between. Or fan edits which use clever editing and overlay soundtracks with pointed lyrics which completely change the artistic intent of the actors /creatives who made the original in a particular way, say make two characters have a romantic chemistry that wasn’t there in the original? Or even the old photoshop manipulation stuff? I thought we’re ok with this in the fandom world, is this that different?

I’m not saying I like AI or you need to. I probably wont interact with it and try to avoid it personally wherever I can. But I do wonder if the arguments people are making against ROP AI edits are actually in good faith? Because then i question why other kinds of fan creations are acceptable?

[hi-im-dazey]

Check this bullshit out

Some of you might know that this is my personal blog. I also have a business blog for my art. It's not fandom art, so I don't talk about it or link it here. I just discovered that 479 of my images have been used to train AI. Most of the works are between 2009 and 2020, for some reason, and a LOT of them came off pinterest, some from redbubble indirectly, via ArtFire (which I don't think exists anymore, but would be the right time frame, so the Rb stuff is from using their thumbnails with watermark there, more recent stuff I've put on Rb after I closed my ArtFire storefront is not coming up. I used to use a watermarked image from Rb to point people towards prints if they preferred that over an original)

So I used this site

https://haveibeentrained.com/

Here's what you should do if you are worried about this.

Use that link and make a profile, it's free.

Type your name into the search feature (or whatever name you used in your image meta data or art web presence)

Wait --it will might take a few tries to get the list to populate, if it comes back saying it can't find anything, wait a few minutes and try again. Once it starts populating, let it finish, this could take a while. my 479 works took it about 5 minutes to load all the way and the option to opt out won't come up until the search is done. Right click on each image (or long press on mobile) and choose "add to opt-out"

Now, once you are done opting all these works out I strongly suggest you yoink all your shit down off of pinterest. And BLOCK pinterest shares on your art sites. (For me, pinterest was the largest offender)

Has the horse already bolted?

Yes, for these particular works. But this gives you a record of saying I do not and did not consent to this. Meaning: further down the road, if legal restitution happens, you have some proof.

After you upload new work, going forward, check back a few times, over the course of a month or so, and if the new work comes up, find out how by clicking on the image and following the source link. This will take you to the site that is feeding your stuff to the monster. If you have an account on that site, remove your content and close your profile.

This site checks for writing too. Make sure to check under your pen name for your writing too!

If you do NOT have an account on that site, it's time to whip out the old DMCA dance

[juliathesuccubus]

Artists UNITE!!

So... With all these changes going on, I got a few things to say.

The new "Block" feature. I put quotes on that because with the new changes made, it is essentially useless. As it says, any accounts blocked will still be able to view your content, but won't be able to engage with them, such as leaving a comment or retweeting or anything. BUT if you truly want to protect your posts and limit who can see what, you can lock your account. But that means you won't be able to get more engagement or new followers.

This also means that NSFW artists/content creators who've blocked minors from seeing their content? Yeah, those minors are gonna have full access anyways and there us nothing we can do about it except maybe report them.

Any abusers/stalkers who like to keep tabs on your accounts? They can see, regardless of being blocked.

This has got to be a violation and Google Play and Apple App Store should put X on blast for it.

The second thing!!

If any of you have seen the tweet going around, there has been a recent change to the Terms of Service and will be effective come November 15th.

It'll let Twitter use your posts (images, videos, audio) to train their Grok AI. You can opt out, but come Novwmber 15th, you just automatically get opted back in.

I dunno about y'all, BUT I DO NOT CONSENT TO HAVING MY STUFF USED FOR AI PURPOSES!!

And if you feel the same, I have a suggestion:

I think that we, as artists and content creators, should unite together and nuke our Twitter/X accounts. I know it's a lot, especially those who have really put a lot of work into it, but would you really want to have all that hard work just be fed to an AI?

I say any and all content we have on Twitter should immediately be migrated over to other sites.

Bluesky is always nice and have no complaints so far and since these changes Twitter/X made, they've gain a huuuuuge amount of traffic.

Cora is another place I've been hearing about. I have no opinions about it so far, but did make an account. I've heard they're very anti-AI, so that's good!

Pillowfort could still be a go-to possibly. Hell, maybe even here on Tumblr since it's been getting active again!

We've got options! We can give one last fuck you to Elongated Muskrat to show what we think about his new changes! But that choice is ultimately up to you.

If you guys wanna follow me, my BlueSky account is here, but fair warning, I do post NSFW art on there.

[feh-alt-battle]

Listen I've been getting real nervous about posting non-poll related stuff but genuinely stay the hell away from me if you believe that generative ai trained off of unwilling and unconsenting artists is a good thing and should be nurtured rather than destroyed and killed off. Block this blog and never come back to me. I DESPISE generative ai, I do not support it, I do not want it here or there or any-fucking-where

"you're just saying that because you're an artist" YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT I'M SAYING THIS BECAUSE I'M AN ARTIST!

Creation came free with your fucking humanity. Want a picture of your blorbo? Draw it yourself. Coward. Only a loser takes the "easy way out" when faced with a challenge. 'it'll take too long' the time will pass anyways, shut up

'but ai gets art into the hands of the disabled' hey I'm literally fucking disabled and I'm telling you that this isn't a good reason, shut up

[oddeyesarcpendulumdragon]

I've been working on these random D&D designs for a while now, and I'm making them available to purchase as adopts for a good cause!

Each design is $45.

$30 of each adoptable will go towards the Palestinian Children's Relief Fund, and $15 will go towards Paypal fees/my student loans.

How to purchase a design:

Email me at entamewitchlulu@gmail.com with the subject header Adoptable Order

In the email, tell me which design you are interested in and your Paypal email. If the design is still available, I will send you a Paypal invoice.

Once the invoice is paid, I will send you the full size image, plus a character sheet and NPC stat block to go with it to use as you'd like!

Regular Housekeeping Stuff

Once you purchase the design, it is yours! You may use it for your D&D games, as commission reference, profile picture, etc. If anyone asks who designed it, though, I'd appreciate a shoutout!

You may not feed the design into an AI training program or use it for NFTs.

Though it should be obvious, once the design is yours, you can pretty much do what you want with it, including changing the character name, ignoring the provided character sheet and turning them into a different character, etc. It's mostly just some fun extras!

[beyondthisdarkhouse]

What is the Tumblr kokobot mental health thing and why does it keep messaging me when I go into various mental health/neurodivergent tags? I'm generally looking for community and I don't appreciate this site deciding I am In Danger. You're a therapist and I feel like you've probably talked about mental health apps before so thought I'd ask

Uuuugh, that thing. I think I blocked it a couple months back. BUT, I'm going to be as fair to it as I can.

The part you and I bumped into is their automated chatbot, which monitors traffic on social media sites to detect people having mental health crises and try to convince them to access mental health support. Apparently their bot got good enough at detecting human behaviour patterns online that they actually spun it off into a separate company for a while and then sold their tech to a corporation, before returning to the mental health idea. They returned to it, critically, as a non-profit, which is why I'm willing to give it a second look at all.

tl;dr: I would not immediately warn everyone away from using it! Which is more than I could say for a lot of Silicon Valley mental health startups. I don't love the current implementation, but I think they might have the makings of a decent mutual aid platform for temporary moments of stress.

Long version below

Like, I was not a fan at all of Trill when Tumblr partnered with it, because I felt that they were using well-intentioned volunteers to do potentially harrowing and dangerous work without adequate training or support. (Or not-so-great volunteers, since I was dubious about their vetting process) And a lot of Kokobot's origin story is in some ways really similar to Trill.

Most of these startups and initiatives mean well. They want to make the world better and help provide comfort and support to people who need that. I admire them for their dedication to a good cause. However, I believe that when you are devoting significant resources to building a system where you ask people to choose you for support in their moments of vulnerability, you cannot put your intentions ahead of their needs.

Like: It is really great that people want to help the less-fortunate. I think it shows warmth of heart to want to go somewhere and build homes for the homeless. But if you've never built a house before, and the houses you build are so poorly constructed that they fall down or catch fire or whatever, and they wouldn't have if you'd put the equivalent amount of money into hiring local out-of-work carpenters to do the work properly, I don't think you should keep operating like that as a charity.

I'm also judging Koko a bit as the former teenager who wanted to help people, in terms of how much they provide guidance and support to the helpers they've recruited.

Finally, I feel the need to remind all of us, as useless as such reminders feel, that if you are not paying for a social media platform, you aren't a customer; you are the product. "Kokobot", the organization, the platform, the AI, are not the core producers of its value. Its users are. Without people in distress to whom to provide support, and without supportive people there in times of distress, it would not exist.

Maybe this will never be an issue. Maybe this conflict will never arise. Maybe the nonprofit organization will be devoted enough to the needs of its userbase that they will serve them faithfully and well. I hope so.

I'm just... jaded, by things I've seen before.

What I don't like at all:

It took me a lot of work to go from looking up Kokobot on Tumblr to understanding how the company worked, what using the app was like, and whether their work was being informed by anyone with a lick of knowledge about mental health care. I still don't know a lot of stuff about how they handle anonymity in situations like imminent suicide or homicide, or abuses of the platform.

Kokobot messaging people out of the blue is creepy as hell. My first response was, "Fuck off, I can TELL you're not ethical." Most ethical guidelines I know of for mental health therapists explicitly forbid directly soliciting clients ("Hey there, I can tell you've got a few issues. Here's my card"), especially when people appear psychologically vulnerable or in distress. The only wiggle room there is when you're working in disaster relief and crisis intervention, but that does not make it an "anything goes" situation.

@kokobot posting lots of testimonials from users about how great their service is. Again, something usually strictly forbidden by ethical standards! When someone has just come to you in distress and you've provided them help, and then ask them to give you a Yelp review, you're not usually going to get thoughtful, measured, and informed feedback. It's a weird power dynamic that might be great advertising, but not great informed consent.

While Koko might be a legit company that does its job well, its presence and behaviour opens up the field of what is acceptable behaviour on social media. If one app can track mental health tags and solicit vulnerable people into joining their group, why not another? What will stop Scientology (which has done this in person for decades) from creating a similar app, pitching it to people in need, and coaching its users to go off all their psychiatric medications and use pseudoscience instead? Where are the safeguards?

What's Not Terrible

Kokobot is clunky and weird, but like I said on my post on Trill, the hardest part of moderation on social media is the amount of labour it takes, and the human cost of that labour. It seems to me that by using AI, Koko might have found an efficient way to automate much of that labour.

I tried out the actual app itself, messaging on Telegram; for my "problem", I just said I was concerned that a friend was messaging Koko a lot and I wanted to make sure it was legit. Sending it out required answers to some pretty vital questions—did I feel hopeful or hopeless about the world? What kinds of best- or worst-case scenarios was I imagining? They were worded in a way that felt human and genuine, and the chatbot was responsive and encouraging before my problem ever got human eyes on it.

(For the record: These are questions that can very quickly give information on whether someone is likely to be a danger to themselves or anyone else, which are really important.)

Then, at the bot's suggestion, I also helped a couple other people, where I was given very rough and ready training on active listening, then coached into writing a response. It avoided a lot of on-ramps to community toxicity, inasmuch as the problems and replies were private and anonymous, and there were instant feedback options if anything was worrying or upsetting.

This process showed what I think was a more sophisticated and useful implementation of AI than, uh....... like 99% of the AI I've seen. This is mostly a statement on the state of AI, but still. Koko seems like the bot's responses were really carefully workshopped and designed by actual humans who knew about crisis intervention and risk assessment.

The replies I got to my "problem" were fairly good, empathetic and genuine. (The bot encourages people to be a little dorky, and seeing an auto-generated response I myself was suggested made me roll my eyes; this could reduce the value for some people.)

I can definitely see the benefit of encouraging people who are feeling distressed to help others. Engaging in peer support encourages empathy, and helps people feel like they've got something to offer, and that problems might be solvable.

In the end, Kokobot is an expansion of the kind of work volunteer-run distress and crisis hotlines do. It has the potential to do a lot of good, but the organization itself has to consider so many other factors and processes than its users do. I sincerely hope it and Tumblr are being extremely thoughtful and careful in how they handle this work.

I would be delighted to be proven wrong, and have them turn out to be totally amazing. I really hope they do.

[angelosearch]

After I graduated from college I sucked at file management and lost a lot of what I wrote in those years. I do have some stuff printed, though. I'm starting to transcribe some of my poems/essays/etc. for safekeeping.

I'm going to share this poem here because it's about writing but I want ya'lls opinion too (poem and poll under the cut).

Writer's Anxiety

Hi, I'm [angelosearch]. I'm a writing major. I'm a student of writing. I write. I write a lot. But I'm not a writer nor poet nor essayist nor author nor artist. Just a writing major. All my writer friends have a "writer's ego," but what if the ego is a no-go more concerned with grade pointed resume sectional blog posts than being pretty or clever with words? Scratch that, I am concerned. So concerned that I shrink at the sound of their sentences dancing above me, floating over my work even with each page I read, word I write, no matter how many cups of coffee or sleepless nights, my words come out sloppy. I watch them wear their writing effortlessly like those who only wear clothes that fit them, but my family never had the money to replace the things I outgrew, so maybe my poetry spills out my bra a bit while your sleek fiction fits your tongue like a glove. I can cover it up with scarves, an outerwear of excuses knitted with "I did this at the last minute"s and "I got writer's block on this one"s.

Everyone talks about writer's block, but what about writer's anxiety? That feeling you get when you realize everyone in the room knows what they're doing but you--or at least that's how they seem. How can they stay so cool as an epiphany slips out their lips? They just put rhythm to the meaning of life and said "Thank you." They fill out their toques and denim jackets, readers grown into writers clad in unbuttoned unbridled confidence... I want to feel that way. I want to write that way. BUT every poem feels like a car swerving into unmanageable metaphors or else a train traveling one way on a single track with no transfers to blandly named towns called Springfield or Coddington. BUT every fiction has a world like a piece of paper sparsely decorated with cardboard characters wearing cheap, floral-print adjectives, endings arriving contrived or premature. BUT every essay is stuck in one form, a record clichely repeating the same facts about your life: "my parents are emotionally divorced" "neither of them went to college" "I feel like I don't belong" "I don't belong-don't belong-DON'T BELONG."

My friends tell me that I am wrong but it sounds like that knee-jerk compliment you get get right after you say "I'm ugly."

Why does nothing I write sound right? I want to know where new style begins and no style ends. I want to think the world just isn't ready, but I'm not that conceded. I can't believe it. I can't assume I'm a writer because I write--most can form words on paper, but not everyone can turn a confession into an expression called art.

End poem!! I think I wrote that in 2013 (The spring of my junior year).

[metaltea]

Oh btw for those who aren't on reddit and aren't keeping up with all the character.ai drama, I highly recommend checking out PygmalionAI! Basically it's a substitute for character.ai... well, a very much work-in-progress one. It's still in development but there should be a site up-and-running soon.

Unlike the devs from CAI these ones are actually listening to and working with the userbase; there will be no filter that blocks out not only nsfw but makes things slower and lobotomizes the AI, making responses a lot less creative and makes it repeat things way more often. I highly recommend checking it out and supporting this AI because, unlike the CAI devs, they deserve it.

Pygmalion AI subreddit

Pygmalion AI (like I said it's very much in development and not exactly user-friendly right now, but you can at least get any idea of how it works right now.)

Pygmalion discord

Log dumping (this is gonna help train the AI from stuff in CAI! If you feel comfortable doing so, pls contribute!)

[fierceawakening]

That person blocked me and will likely block earl too, but:

earlgraytay

3m ago

The other thing is, like...

Okay, look, I've played around with AI art some, and I've even made some attempts to use it in digital collage. I am also a (mediocre!) artist, mostly a cartoonist, and I draw a lot of anime-inspired stuff. I know what it's like to be told that your art style isn't "real art".

.......the process of using an AI to generate an image is completely different from the process of creating more conventional art, and the differences in that process make it completely uninteresting to me, as both an artist and an enjoyer of art.

A lot of what "speaks to me" about a piece of art is figuring out why the artist made the choices they made-on both the macro and micro level- and seeing how they used the techniques they had at their disposal.

AI art... doesn't really do it for me, unless it's part of a collage or assemblage, because neither of those things are really present. When you're working with a generative AI, you're just not making the same kinds of micro level choices about lighting, colour, scene composition, and so on- you're letting the computer make those choices for you. Similarly, there's no real analysis of technique to be done on an AI generated image. The closest thing to "technique" is, bluntly, pushing the "pull from gacha" button. There's nothing to talk about there.

....I am not even, like, Against AI Art Because It's Theft. it's just *boring* to me. Because a lot of the things that interest me most about art just aren't there.

===

I feel this way in general too. I know that a lot of prompters do get very elaborate: "a green unicorn with a yellow mane facing right reading a physics book with a steaming cup of tea on the desk in front of them. Their expression is gentle and kind." but... all of the ways to portray that, in making traditional art, whether or not you're drawing, are little choices that give the work a particular character and personality.

That said, my strongest objection (just saying I disagree with Earl, not trying to say he's Wrong Bad or something) is still consent. You can't throw a spitball on X without hitting an artist posting "Just found out I was on the hidden list of people used to train Midjourney, fuck that, I never gave permission."

If people did not give permission, using the tool is going against their LITERAL STATED WISHES. That's what's not cool, for me.

If everyone else was like "yeah sure train AI on my work, it's posted publicly, that means I accepted this risk even though I didn't know at the time it even existed" and only I personally was like "I hope my novels aren't in there," I'd figure I've just got weird preferences and adjust (though I think I'd still advocate for me and people like me to be able to petition for our work to be excluded/removed from the dataset, if this is possible.)

But it's not at ALL uncommon for people to feel they should have had a say and to get upset that they didn't. So I'm not going to use something they're angry about not having had a say in.

For me that's just the decent thing to do? Which is why that person's rage is so confusing to me. They obviously think it's morally acceptable where I don't, but they block instead of explaining why.

That's... I don't want to say that's a guilty conscience, I don't know, but it's sure weird. If consent doesn't matter here and it's weird scrupulosity that makes me think it does, surely that can be logically explained?

Like. My guy. I got a Master's in philosophy. "You are wrong about the base assumptions of how morality works, all the way down" was just Tuesday for about seven years of my life there. I can handle you explaining why you think I'm wrong to think consent matters here.

Or is that why Lmao is all you've got?

[hildred-rex]

Ooh, these are excellent! I've been looking for something like Floorplanner for absolutely ages!

Anyhow, I thought I'd contribute some of my own hoard, though it skews more toward worldbuilding. Since I tend to ramble, I've bolded my resource links to make them easier to skim to.

I've tried to group them into research, cartography, and space stuff (which I think should be decreasing order of relevance to most people).

Long, so it's below the cut.

Always check your licenses.

Research

Wikimedia Commons. Extensive collection of images and other media, featuring an in-depth (though hard-to-navigate) categorization system. I've linked to "train stations photographed in the 1920s" as an example.

CCSearch. Lets you search several places with creative-commons media from one dashboard. By no means complete; I may make a post with all the other sources I've found (primarily of images) someday.

Some good (partly-)public-domain image collections that CCSearch doesn't cover: Europeana, the New York Public Library, the British Library (hard to search), and the Met.

Archive.org has a great collection of public-domain books (among other things under other licenses), which you can restrict by date; use the search bar under the little colored icons. It's also the group responsible for the Wayback Machine, which is very useful for other reasons.

Wiktionary. A project of the Wikimedia Foundation, Wiktionary is a free online dictionary with extensive coverage and is available in multiple languages -- though the completeness of the version in any given language is going to depend on the number of volunteers who speak that language. English is very good, Spanish seems solid but I've experimented with it less, and Esperanto's coverage is poor.

NGrams. A feature of Google Books where you can compare the relative frequencies of various terms over time, which can give you a sense of how famous various historical people actually were. I've given an example with three writers here, and it does check out with what I know of their relative historical popularities. (Chambers wrote The King in Yellow early on, but then switched over to romances and became extremely popular. Machen had a boom in popularity in the 1920s.)

Zompist.com. The website of a veteran conlanger and worldbuilder, chock full of interesting stuff even beyond what's considered resources. Mostly useful for information; I've linked to a page giving some basic Blender instructions for conworlders.

The resources flair on r/worldbuilding is a great place to look for more, well, worldbuilding resources.

The Public Domain Review is good to keep tabs on if you're interested in the public domain (or just weird old stuff).

Cartography (and Planet Design)

K. M. Alexander's fantasy map brushes. CC0 (i.e., released into the public domain, or more relevantly free!). They're derived from real historical maps and have incredible variety, covering everything from normal geographical features to whole city blocks to battles(?!). They work in GIMP, Procreate, Photoshop, and Affinity Designer (sp?); I've tested GIMP and Procreate myself.

Azgaar's Fantasy Map Generator. Exactly what it says on the tin. You can customize the output quite a bit, in terms of appearance and actual contents. Based on some admittedly not very scientific tests I've run it doesn't seem to be fully accurate to climate science and whatnot, but it's much closer than anything I could do on my own and certainly very useful. (To export images of your whole map, use svg export and make a png using some other tool. The png/jpg exports don't save the whole map.)

Free -- and web-based, so it works on everything.

Morality-and-AI disclaimer: Unfortunately, the dev recently created a databank of AI-created characters, made of AI "art" and AI-generated character descriptions, and integrated it as a feature in the FMG. That is called Deorum and appears to be un-removable from the FMG, though you can turn off the popup/actual use of Deorum and delete everything out of the "character" list. Nothing else runs on AI; it's all procedural generation, which sounds similar but is not at all the same thing.

GProjector. Converts maps from one projection to another (with many, many options). Mostly useful for work with the FMG, which outputs equirectangular (a very distorted projection). Made by the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, part of NASA. Is a download and requires Java 11+.

Space Stuff

Endeavor. A star atlas, for the sci-fi writers among us. My favorite feature is that it lets you see how the stars would look from other stars. (I've linked to the help page so you get some idea of what it's about.)

PlanetMaker. Somewhat misnamed; unlike the FMG, it doesn't actually make a planet. It lets you make equirectangular maps into something that looks like an artist's interpretation of a planet. It seems to have been made for the website owner's own use, since I haven't managed to find documentation.

JSOrrery. Check out the positions of various solar-system objects at various points in time, as revealed by the power of math!

Solar System Simulator. NASA's second appearance on this list, though this is from JPL rather than GISS. This makes a (low-res) image of what some perspective on the solar system would look like at some date.

Honorable Mentions

Honorable mentions go to to Inkscape (vector), GIMP (raster), Blender (3D), and Khan Academy (miscellaneous knowledge; I'm currently using it to pick up the basics of plate tectonics) for being useful.

hot artists don't gatekeep

I've been resource gathering for YEARS so now I am going to share my dragons hoard

Floorplanner. Design and furnish a house for you to use for having a consistent background in your comic or anything! Free, you need an account, easy to use, and you can save multiple houses.

Comparing Heights. Input the heights of characters to see what the different is between them. Great for keeping consistency. Free.

Magma. Draw online with friends in real time. Great for practice or hanging out. Free, paid plan available, account preferred.

Smithsonian Open Access. Loads of free images. Free.

SketchDaily. Lots of pose references, massive library, is set on a timer so you can practice quick figure drawing. Free.

SculptGL. A sculpting tool which I am yet to master, but you should be able to make whatever 3d object you like with it. free.

Pexels. Free stock images. And the search engine is actually pretty good at pulling up what you want.

Figurosity. Great pose references, diverse body types, lots of "how to draw" videos directly on the site, the models are 3d and you can rotate the angle, but you can't make custom poses or edit body proportions. Free, account option, paid plans available.

Line of Action. More drawing references, this one also has a focus on expressions, hands/feet, animals, landscapes. Free.

Animal Photo. You pose a 3d skull model and select an animal species, and they give you a bunch of photo references for that animal at that angle. Super handy. Free.

Height Weight Chart. You ever see an OC listed as having a certain weight but then they look Wildly different than the number suggests? Well here's a site to avoid that! It shows real people at different weights and heights to give you a better idea of what these abstract numbers all look like. Free to use.