#yes this includes AI generated art

[yukidragon]

Just wanted to remind everyone that the fact that you are creating art is a wonderful thing, and you're wonderful for sharing it. I guarantee that someone out there is happy that they found your creation.

This applies to all forms of art - drawing, writing, photography, game development, music composition, voice acting, choreographed dances, etc. Just the fact that you are creating anything is amazing. You're putting your soul and your experiences that make you, you into that art, and it truly shines. This is why even a silly doodle can really resonate with others.

Keep creating. You're making the world a better place, and I'm so proud of you.

[queen-mabs-revenge]

communist generative ai boosters on this website truly like

[megalunalexi-aesthetic]

Hmm.....

Gods, posts like these really make me want to make my own AI (I'm an artist and amateur coder, bear with me)

The thing that makes me saddest is that I think AI could be really fun and creative and collaborative. It can also absolutely be art and take effort, in that the coder creates it with effort and skill.

Imagine an AI which had an attached gallery to every image, so you can go see what it referenced. Imagine everything in it - art, photos, the descriptions - was all donated voluntarily, with credit every time it made something. Imagine if it was allowed to create the weird shapes AI is prone to, rather than being shoved closer and closer to realism.

If it stays small, then it makes no impact, completely harmless. If it gets bigger, it would potentially introduce people to new artists, combine things which never would have been combined by a human, and genuinely make art a human is incapable of making (I fucking ADORED the weird shit the early AIs were coming up with!!)

The saddest thing about AI is that it COULD have been actually cool, it WAS cool for a long time (VQGAN+clip, anyone?), and like everything else capitalism ruined it.

It doesn't HAVE to be nothing, it's just had the soul sucked out like everything else seems to.

ai generated images make me increasingly sad and tired the more i see them in more and more casual contexts. i dont know how to explain, but it just fills the world with a bunch of nothing. no matter how visually stunning the pictures might be, there's nothing behind it for me. no dedication, no emotions, no feelings, no hard work or creativity, nothing i can truly think about, admire or enjoy. i dont think thats how art is supposed to be

[xi-phos]

Why is everyone around me using AI for every single thing ever. Not to sound like a boomer but 5 years ago everyone was actually using their heads and now y'all's brain activity is comparable to a vegetable. You are actively killing your brain. Do you realise that?? Not using your neuron connections will weaken them which makes you stupid. Our monkey ancestors worked hard to make us smart enough to survive and you are using a shitty computer program to think for you. They would be so dissapointed.

[ktempestbradford]

I have been on a Willy Wonkified journey today and I need y'all to come with me

It started so innocently. Scrolling Google News I come across this article on Ars Technica:

At first glance I thought what happened was parents saw AI-generated images of an event their kids were at and became concerned, then realized it was fake. The reality? Oh so much better.

On Saturday, event organizers shut down a Glasgow-based "Willy's Chocolate Experience" after customers complained that the unofficial Wonka-inspired event, which took place in a sparsely decorated venue, did not match the lush AI-generated images listed on its official website.... According to Sky News, police were called to the event, and "advice was given."

Thing is, the people who paid to go were obviously not expecting exactly this:

But I can see how they'd be a bit pissed upon arriving to this:

It gets worse.

"Tempest, how could it possibly--"

source of this video that also includes this charming description:

Made up a villain called The Unknown — 'an evil chocolate maker who lives in the walls'

There is already a meme.

Oh yes, the Wish.com Oompa Loompa:

Who has already done an interview!

As bad (and hilarious) as this all is, I got curious about the company that put on this event. Did they somehow overreach? Did the actors they hired back out at the last minute? (Or after they saw the script...) Oddly enough, it doesn't seem so!

Given what I found when poking around I'm legit surprised there was an event at all. Cuz this outfit seems to be 100% a scam.

The website for this specific event is here and it has many AI generated images on it, as stated. I don't think anyone who bought tickets looked very closely at these images, otherwise they might have been concerned about how much Catgacating their children would be exposed to.

Yes, Catgacating. You know, CATgacating!

I personally don't think anyone should serve exarserdray flavored lollipops in public spaces given how many people are allergic to it. And the sweet teats might not have been age appropriate.

Though the Twilight Tunnel looks pretty cool:

I'm not sure that Dim Tight Twdrding is safe. I've also been warned that Vivue Sounds are in that weird frequency range that makes you poop your pants upon hearing them.

Yes, Virginia, these folks used an AI image generator for everything on the website and used Chat GPT for some of the text! From the FAQ:

Q: I cannot go on the available days. Will you have more dates in the future? A: Should there be capacity when you arrive, then you will be able to enter without any problems. In the event that this is not the case, we may ask you to wait a bit.

Fear not, for this question is asked again a few lines down and the answer makes more sense.

Curious about the events company behind this disaster, I took myself over to the homepage of House of Illuminati and I was not disappointed.

I would 100% trust these people to plan my wedding.

This abomination of a website is a badly edited WordPress blog filled with AI art and just enough blog posts to make the casual viewer think that it's a legit business for about 0.0004 seconds.

Their attention to detail is stunning, from how they left up the default first post every WP blog gets to how they didn't bother changing the name on several images, thus revealing where they came from. Like this one:

With the lovely and compact filename "DALL·E-2024-01-30-09.50.54-Imagine-a-scene-where-fantasy-and-reality-merge-seamlessly.-In-the-foreground-a-grand-interactive-gala-is-taking-place-filled-with-elegant-guests-i.png"

"Concept.png" came from the same AI generator that gets text almost, but not quiiiiiite right:

There are a suspicious number of .webp images in the uploads, which makes me think they either stole them from other sites where AI "art" was uploaded or they didn't want to pay for the hi-res versions of some and just grabbed the preview image.

The real fun came when I noticed this filename: Before-and-After-Eventologists-Transformation-Edgbaston-Cricket-Ground-1024x1024-1.jpg and decided to do a Google image search. Friends, you will be shocked to hear that the image in question, found on this post touting how they can transform a boring warehouse into a fun event space, was stolen from this actual event planner.

Even better, this weirdly grainy image?

From a post that claims to be about the preparations for a "Willy Wonka" experience (we'll get to this in a minute), is not only NOT an actual image of anyone preparing anything for Illuminati's event, it is stolen from a YouTube thumbnail that's been chopped to remove the name of the company that actually made this. Here's the video.

If you actually read the blog posts they're all copypasta or some AI generated crap. To the point where this seems like not a real business at all. There's very specific business information at the bottom, but nothing else seems real.

As I said, I'm kinda surprised they put on an event at all. This has, "And then they ran off with all our money!" written all over it. I'm perplexed.

And also wondering when the copyright lawyers are gonna start calling, because...

This post explicitly says they're putting together a "Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory Experience" complete with golden tickets.

Somewhere along the line someone must have wised up, because the actual event was called "Willys Chocolate Experience" (note the lack of apostrophe) and the script they handed to the actors about 10 minutes before they were supposed to "perform" was about a "Willy McDuff" and his chocolate factory.

As I was going through this madness with friends in a chat, one pointed out that it took very little prompting to get the free Chat GPT to spit out an event description and such very similar to all this while avoiding copyrighted phrases. But he couldn't figure out where the McDuff came from since it wasn't the type of thing GPT would usually spit out...

Until he altered the prompt to include it would be happening in Glasgow, Scotland.

You cannot make this stuff up.

But truly, honestly, I do not even understand why they didn't take the money and run. Clearly this was all set up to be a scam. A lazy, AI generated scam.

Everything from the website to the event images to the copy to the "script" to the names of things was either stolen or AI generated (aka stolen). Hell, I'd be looking for some poor Japanese visitor wandering the streets of Glasgow, confused, after being jacked for his mascot costume.

HE LIVES IN THE WALLS, Y'ALL.

[llghtlessflames]

yes generating 'content' with ai has actual effects on artists lives and careers btw. studios would rather generate scripts and voices and pictures with artificial fucking intelligence than pay actual artists.

[txttletale]

hey what’s up, i think you’re pretty cool but disagree with you on the whole ai can make art thing. to me, without the purpose from an actual person creating the piece, it’s not art but an image; as all human art has purpose. some driving factor in a work, compared to a program which purely creates the prompt without further intention. i was wondering what your insight on this is? either way, hope you have a great day

well, first of all, does art require 'purpose'? there's this view of art which has very much calcified in "anti-AI" rhetoric, that art is some linear process of communication from one individual to another: an Artist puts some Meaning into a unit of Art, which others can then view to Recieve that Meaning. you can hold this view, but i don't! i'm much more of a stuart hall-head on this, i think that there is no such transfusion of Intent and that rather the 'meaning' of a piece is something that exists only in the interplay between text and reader. reading is an active, interpretative process of decoding, not a passive absorptive one. so i dispute, firstly, that 'purpose' is to begin with a necessary or even imporant element of art.

moreover i think this argument rests on a very arbitrarily selective view of what counts as "an actual person creating the piece" -- 'the prompt' is, itself, an obvious artistic contribution, a place where an artist can impart huge amounts of direction, vision, and so on. in fact, i completely reject the claim of both the technology's salesman and its biggest detractors that genAI "makes art" -- to quote kerry mitchell's fractal art manifesto: "Turn a computer on and leave it alone for an hour. When you come back, no art will have been generated." in the past, i've posed questions about generative art pieces to demonstrate this

secondly, of course, the process does not end after image generation from prompt for serious generative artists--the ones who are serious about the artform (rather than tech guys trying to do marketing for the Magical Art Box) frequently iterate and iterate, generating a range of iterations and then picking one to iterate on further, so on and so forth, until the final image they choose to share is one that contains within it the traces of a thousand discrete choices on behalf of the artist (two pretty good explanations of this from people who actually do this stuff can be found here and here)

third and finally, that very choice to share the image is itself an artistic decision! we (and by we, i mean, anyone who cares about what art is) have been talking about this since fountain -- display is a form of artistic intent, taking something and putting it forward and saying 'this is art' is in and of itself an artistic decision being made even if the thing itself is unaltered: see, for example, the entire discipline of 'found art'. once someone challenged me, yknow, "if you did a google search, would that be art?" and my answer to that is, if you screenshot that google search and share it as art, then yes, resoundingly yes! curation and presentation recontextualizes objects, turning them into rich texts through the simple process of reframing them. so even if you granted that genAI output is inherently random computer noise (i don't, of course) -- i still think that the act of presenting it as art makes it so.

since i assume you're not familiar with anything interesting in the medium, because the most popular stuff made with genAI is pure "lo-fi girl in ghibli style" type slop, let me share some genAI pieces (or genAI-influenced pieces) that i think are powerful and interesting:

the meat gala, rob sheridan (warning: body horror!)

secret horses (does anyone know the original source on this?)

infinite art machine, reachartwork

ethinically ambigaus, james tamagotchi

mcdonalds simpsons porn room, wayneradiotv

software greatman, everything everything (the music is completely made by the band, but genAI was partially responsible for the lyrics -- including the title and the several interesting pseudo-kennings)

i want a love like this music video, everything everything

cocaine is the motor of the modern world, bots of new york

poison the walker, roborosewatermasters (here's my analysis posts on it too)

not all of these were necessarily intended as art: but i think they are rich and fascinating texts when read that way -- they have certainly impacted me as much as any art has.

anyways, whether you agree or not, i hope this gives you some stuff to think about, thanks for sharing your thoughts :)

[sirfrogsworth]

Looking at some of your work, it is stunning but it is very similar in style to AI artwork, do you have any recommendations for how to tell apart photography like yours from AI.

I've been thinking about this. And this may sound controversial at first, but I'm hoping people will hear me out.

We should stop trying so hard to detect AI art.

I think we should all lift that burden from our brains.

I have often talked about "woke goggles." Where conservatives have lost the ability to enjoy anything because they are hypervigilant about detecting anything woke. They've cursed themselves into just hating everything. All they have left is the "God's Not Dead" Cinematic Universe.

And I worry people are getting AI goggles now. They are so concerned about accidentally enjoying robot art and hurting artists that they have overcorrected to the point where they are hurting artists.

One cannot say "AI is all soulless slop that always looks bad" and then accuse a real artist of making something that looks like AI and not hurt them. By doing so, it includes the baggage of all of the "slop" comments along with it. This crusade is having collateral damage to the very artists we are trying to protect.

Yes, we need to be cautious about malicious AI images. Misinformation and deepfakes are going to be a big problem. People using AI imagery for profit is already a mess. But if you are cruising your feed and like a cool sci-fi robot gal or a photo of a waterfall and it turns out to be AI... that's fine.

It was trained by real artists and AI is going to create some cool shit because of that.

Honestly, I think a lot of the worst slop is because the dipshits creating the prompts have no artistic taste. People keep blaming the AI for how bad it looks and often don't consider it is a product of the loser who published it.

There is plenty of non-slop out there that has fooled me. And, like it or not, it is going to get harder and harder to tell what is AI. Until there are better tools or better regulations, I don't think there is much we can do to avoid enjoying AI art every once in a while. If only by accident.

Current "AI detectors" are mostly a scam. Even the best forensic-level AI image detectors struggle to stay above 70–80% accuracy across a wide range of models and image types. And that's in controlled lab conditions.

Free online tools often drop to near coin-flip accuracy (50–60%), especially with newer image generators and post-processing applied.

The best way to avoid AI imagery is to look at an artist's body of work. It's much harder to create consistent, non-obvious fake images in a large sample size. That is usually enough to have confidence in authenticity. Plus, if they have posted similar art before 2022, you can pretty much rule out any shenanigans.

Otis literally died before genAI was available.

But images you see in the wild, just let yourself enjoy them if that is what your brain wants to do. It'll be okay.

I just think we are attacking this backwards. If we want to protect artists, we need to support them.

Calling out random AI art does not support them.

It does not put money in their pockets.

It does not grow their audience.

Over a decade ago I tried to lead a fight to create better systems of attribution on websites like Reddit and Imgur. I even spoke to the Imgur team after an article was written about me.

I asked them to allow sources on their posts and to develop tech that would help people find where an image came from. They said they were "working on it" and it never manifested.

IMAGE SHARING SITES STEAL MORE FROM ARTISTS THAN AI.

But we just kind of accepted it. No one really joined me in my fight. The prevailing defeatist attitude was, "That's just the way it is."

I think now is the time to demand better attribution systems. We need to be vigilant about making sure as many posts as possible have good sourcing. If an image on Reddit goes viral, the top comment should be the source. And if it isn't, you should try to find it and add it.

Just to be clear, "credit to the original artist" is NOT proper attribution.

And perhaps we can lobby these image sharing sites to create better sourcing systems and tools. They could even use fucking AI to find the earliest posted version of an image.

And it would be nice if it didn't require people to go into the comments to find the source. It could just be in the headline. They could even create little badges "made by a human" for verified artists.

Good attribution helps artists grow their audience. It is one of the single most effective things you can do to help them.

I literally just got this message...

There are maybe 10 popular artists who I helped grow their audience early on. Just because I reblogged their work and added links to all of their social media. I even hired my best friend to add sourcing information to every post because I believed so much in good attribution.

Calling out AI art may feel good in the moment. You caught someone trying to trick people and it feels like justice. But, in most cases, the tangible benefits to real artists seem small. It impedes your ability to enjoy art without always being suspicious. And the risk of telling someone you think they make soulless slop doesn't seem worth it.

But putting that time and effort into attribution *would* be worth it. I have proven it time and time again.

I also think people should consider having a monthly art budget. I don't care if it is $5. But if we all commit to seeking out cool artists and being their collective patrons, we could really make a difference and keep real art alive. Just commit to finding a cool new artist every month and financially contributing to them in some way.

On a bigger scale I think advocating for universal basic income, art grants for education and creation, and government regulation of AI would all be helpful long term goals. Though I think our friends in Europe may have to take the lead on regulation at the moment.

So...

Stop worrying about enjoying or calling out AI art.

Demand better attribution from image sharing sites.

Make sure all art has a source listed.

Start an art budget.

Advocate for better regulations.

[chipper-smol]

ISAT 2025 Art Bang!

After the telephone game lot of people told me that they were interested in joining another project just like it so here we are!

Sign up is available here!

There's a project server invite at the end, you're not required to join it but please don't feel anxious to join! The previous participants have created a very kind community 'v'

The timeline!

What is an Art Bang?

An art bang is meant to create a BANG of fanwork in the fandom! You (and as many authors who sign up) come together to write fanfics from scratch. The fanfic can be an idea that you’ve been wanting to write for a while and just haven’t gotten the motivation to, a fanfic you haven’t been able to continue but want to, or it can be an idea someone else suggests when you join.

Halfway through the writing process authors will be paired up with artists who have read a summary of their work and want to draw for it. When everything is finished, everyone will release their fanfic and fanart in the same week in an explosion of fanworks!

More info below the readmore!

How does it work?

Step 1: Authors sign up and start writing on June 28th. Authors CANNOT add any words to their official word count until after June 28th.

Step 2: After about a month, Authors submit a snippet or summary of their fic which is presented to the artist participants anonymously.

Step 3: Artists choose as many fics that they’d be interested in drawing for and I organize and pair up everyone together.

Step 4: Authors finish up writing, Artists finish up drawing.

Step 5: Works are scheduled to be uploaded to Ao3 and/or Tumblr!

Rules/Expectations

If you use generative AI or AI “assistance” I will trap you in a timeloop ☆*: .｡. o(≧▽≦)o .｡.:*☆

AI anything is not allowed under any circumstances and will get you immediately banned from this project and any future projects.

All fics must be uploaded to either Ao3 or Tumblr

Spoilers for ISAT and SASASA:P are not reinforced in the Discord server

Authors

Authors must write at least 10k words in total.

Authors can write as many chapters and fanfics as they want.

Can be about anything! It can even be a continuation of a previous fic that you’ve lost motivation on, but you still must write at least 10k words in total.

Can be any rating! General Audiences to Explicit are welcome 

Authors who want to write Explicit fics must confirm they are 18 years or older.

Artists

Artists must create at least one finished artwork. 

If artists want to create something like an animation or animatic, they can check in with me and we can decide together what is a reasonable finished goal.

Artists can create artwork for multiple fics.

Artists who want to draw for explicit fics must confirm they are 18 years or older.

Can I share snippets of my work before the artist claims?

Preferably no, artist claims are made anonymously so that works are picked without any bias.

10k words seems like a lot?

Altogether, yes, but this challenge extends over 2.5 - 3 months, that’s roughly 3k words a month.

Can I write multiple fics?

Yes, but one of them needs to reach the 10k word mark.

Do explicit fics mean nsfw/sex included things, or is it general heavy themed ones?

Both. Nsfw/sex and general heavy themes.

How 'high level' do the art pieces need to be? i dont want to just do simple sketches of course but how complex should they be?

Since you'll be given a month+ to work on your piece, at the minimum it should be a polished piece. IE Lineart, color, shading

[jadeharleyinc]

the scale of AI's ecological footprint

standalone version of my response to the following:

"you need soulless art? [...] why should you get to use all that computing power and electricity to produce some shitty AI art? i don’t actually think you’re entitled to consume those resources." "i think we all deserve nice things. [...] AI art is not a nice thing. it doesn’t meaningfully contribute to us thriving and the cost in terms of energy use [...] is too fucking much. none of us can afford to foot the bill." "go watch some tv show or consume some art that already exists. […] you know what’s more environmentally and economically sustainable […]? museums. galleries. being in nature."

you can run free and open source AI art programs on your personal computer, with no internet connection. this doesn't require much more electricity than running a resource-intensive video game on that same computer. i think it's important to consume less. but if you make these arguments about AI, do you apply them to video games too? do you tell Fortnite players to play board games and go to museums instead?

speaking of museums: if you drive 3 miles total to a museum and back home, you have consumed more energy and created more pollution than generating AI images for 24 hours straight (this comes out to roughly 1400 AI images). "being in nature" also involves at least this much driving, usually. i don't think these are more environmentally-conscious alternatives.

obviously, an AI image model costs energy to train in the first place, but take Stable Diffusion v2 as an example: it took 40,000 to 60,000 kWh to train. let's go with the upper bound. if you assume ~125g of CO2 per kWh, that's ~7.5 tons of CO2. to put this into perspective, a single person driving a single car for 12 months emits 4.6 tons of CO2. meanwhile, for example, the creation of a high-budget movie emits 2840 tons of CO2.

is the carbon cost of a single car being driven for 20 months, or 1/378th of a Marvel movie, worth letting anyone with a mid-end computer, anywhere, run free offline software that consumes a gaming session's worth of electricity to produce hundreds of images? i would say yes. in a heartbeat.

even if you see creating AI images as "less soulful" than consuming Marvel/Fortnite content, it's undeniably "more useful" to humanity as a tool. not to mention this usefulness includes reducing the footprint of creating media. AI is more environment-friendly than human labor on digital creative tasks, since it can get a task done with much less computer usage, doesn't commute to work, and doesn't eat.

and speaking of eating, another comparison: if you made an AI image program generate images non-stop for every second of every day for an entire year, you could offset your carbon footprint by… eating 30% less beef and lamb. not pork. not even meat in general. just beef and lamb.

the tech industry is guilty of plenty of horrendous stuff. but when it comes to the individual impact of AI, saying "i don’t actually think you’re entitled to consume those resources. do you need this? is this making you thrive?" to an individual running an AI program for 45 minutes a day per month is equivalent to questioning whether that person is entitled to a single 3 mile car drive once per month or a single meatball's worth of beef once per month. because all of these have the same CO2 footprint.

so yeah. i agree, i think we should drive less, eat less beef, stream less video, consume less. but i don't think we should tell people "stop using AI programs, just watch a TV show, go to a museum, go hiking, etc", for the same reason i wouldn't tell someone "stop playing video games and play board games instead". i don't think this is a productive angle.

(sources and number-crunching under the cut.)

good general resource: GiovanH's article "Is AI eating all the energy?", which highlights the negligible costs of running an AI program, the moderate costs of creating an AI model, and the actual indefensible energy waste coming from specific companies deploying AI irresponsibly.

CO2 emissions from running AI art programs: a) one AI image takes 3 Wh of electricity. b) one AI image takes 1mn in, for example, Midjourney. c) so if you create 1 AI image per minute for 24 hours straight, or for 45 minutes per day for a month, you've consumed 4.3 kWh. d) using the UK electric grid through 2024 as an example, the production of 1 kWh releases 124g of CO2. therefore the production of 4.3 kWh releases 533g (~0.5 kg) of CO2.

CO2 emissions from driving your car: cars in the EU emit 106.4g of CO2 per km. that's 171.19g for 1 mile, or 513g (~0.5 kg) for 3 miles.

costs of training the Stable Diffusion v2 model: quoting GiovanH's article linked in 1. "Generative models go through the same process of training. The Stable Diffusion v2 model was trained on A100 PCIe 40 GB cards running for a combined 200,000 hours, which is a specialized AI GPU that can pull a maximum of 300 W. 300 W for 200,000 hours gives a total energy consumption of 60,000 kWh. This is a high bound that assumes full usage of every chip for the entire period; SD2’s own carbon emission report indicates it likely used significantly less power than this, and other research has shown it can be done for less." at 124g of CO2 per kWh, this comes out to 7440 kg.

CO2 emissions from red meat: a) carbon footprint of eating plenty of red meat, some red meat, only white meat, no meat, and no animal products the difference between a beef/lamb diet and a no-beef-or-lamb diet comes down to 600 kg of CO2 per year. b) Americans consume 42g of beef per day. this doesn't really account for lamb (egads! my math is ruined!) but that's about 1.2 kg per month or 15 kg per year. that single piece of 42g has a 1.65kg CO2 footprint. so our 3 mile drive/4.3 kWh of AI usage have the same carbon footprint as a 12g piece of beef. roughly the size of a meatball [citation needed].

[ellipsus-writes]

Each week (or so), we'll highlight the relevant (and sometimes rage-inducing) news adjacent to writing and freedom of expression. This week:

Inkitt’s AI-powered fiction factory

Inkitt started in the mid-2010s as a cozy platform where anyone could share their writing. Fast forward twenty twenty-fuckkkkk, and like most startups, it’s pivoted hard into AI-fueled content production with the soul of an algorithm.

Pictured: Inkitt preparing human-generated work for an AI-powered flume ride to The Unknown.

Here’s how it works: Inkitt monitors reader engagement with tracking software, then picks popular stories to publish on its premium app, Galatea. From there, stories can get spun into sequels, spinoffs, or adapted for GalateaTV… often with minimal author involvement. Authors get an undisclosed cut of revenue, but for most, it’s a fraction of what they’d earn with a traditional publisher (let alone self-publishing).

“'They prey on new writers who have no idea what they’re doing,' said the writer of one popular Galatea series."

Many, many authors have side-eyed or outright decried the platform as inherently predatory for years, due to nebulous payout promises. And much of the concern centers on contracts that don’t require authors’ consent for editorial changes or AI-generated “additions” to the original text.

Now, Inkitt has gone full DiSrUpTiOn, leaning heavily on generative AI to ghostwrite, edit, generate audiobook narration, and design covers, under the banner of “democratizing storytelling.” (AI? In my democratized storytelling platform? It’s more likely than you think.)

Pictured: Inkitt’s CEO looking at the most-read stories.

But Inkitt’s CEO doesn’t seem too concerned about what authors think: “His business model doesn’t need them.”

The company recently raised $37 million, with backers including former CEOs of Sony, Penguin, and HarperCollins, proving once again that publishing loves a disruptor… as long as it disrupts creatives, not capital. And more AI companies are mushrooming up to chase the same vision: “a vision of human-created art becoming the raw material for AI-powered, corporate-owned content-production machines—a scenario in which humans would play an ever-shrinking role.”

(Not to say we predicted this, but…)

Welcome to the creator-industrial complex.

Publishers to AI: Stop stealing our stuff (please?)

Major publishers—including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, and Vox Media—have launched a "Support Responsible AI" campaign, urging the U.S. government to regulate AI's use of copyrighted content.

Like last month's campaigns by the Authors Guild and the UK's Society of Authors, there's a website where where you can (and should!) contact your representatives to say, “Hey, maybe stop letting billion-dollar tech giants strip-mine journalism.”

The campaign’s ads carry slogans like “Stop AI Theft” and “AI Steals From You Too” and call for legislation that would force AI companies to pay for the content they train on and clearly label AI-generated content with attribution. This follows lobbying by OpenAI and Google to make it legal to scrape and train on copyrighted material without consent.

The publishers assert they are not explicitly anti-AI, but advocate for a “fair” system that respects intellectual property and supports journalism.

But… awkward, The Washington Post—now owned by Jeff Bezos—has reportedly already struck a deal with OpenAI to license and summarize its content. So, mixed signals.

Still, as the campaign reminds us: “Stealing is un-American.”

(Unless it’s profitable.)

#WarForever

We at Ellipsus love a good meme-turned-megaproject. Back in January, the-app-formerly-known-as-Twitter user @lolt64 tweeted a cryptic line about "the frozen wastes of europa,” the earliest reference to the never-ending war on Jupiter’s icy moon.

A slew of bleak dispatches from weary, doomed soldiers entrenched on Europa’s ice fields snowballed (iceberged?) into a sprawling saga, yes-and-ing with fan art, vignettes, and memes under the hashtag #WarForever.

It’s not quite X’s answer to Goncharov: It turns out WarForever is some flavor of viral marketing for a tabletop RPG zine. But the internet ran with it anyway, with NASA playing the Scorcese of the stars.

In a digital hellworld increasingly dominated by AI slopification, data harvesting, and “content at scale,” projects like WarForever are a blessed reminder that creativity—actual, human creativity—perseveres.

Even on a frozen moon. Even here.

Let us know if you find something other writers should know about, (or join our Discord and share it there!)

- The Ellipsus Team xo

[keriarentikai]

Fandom permission statements

Hello, I am here with yet another pitch for writers to add a permission statement to their AO3 bio! Posts about permission statements tend to circulate among the podfic community, which is really preaching to the choir, so I would really love it if some writer-types also reblog this. ❤️

(While permission statements can and do address multiple types of transformative work, this post very podfic-centric.)

What is a permission statement?

A permission statement tells people who create works based on fanfics (e.g. podfic, art, remixes) whether or not you're okay with people making stuff based on your writing and in what circumstances.

Even if you're not up for giving everyone permission for everything, having a statement we can read is SO appreciated!

What is blanket permission?

Blanket permission is a term podficcers use for permissions that let us create and post podfic without having to contact the author. We love this!

What other kinds of permission statements are there and why would I still want to use one?

If you don't want to give blanket permission, having a permission statement telling folks what you are and aren't okay with helps a lot!

If an author doesn't want to give blanket permission, a statement encouraging podfic but asking a podficcer to ask first still tells us you're interested and that we can expect to receive a friendly (even if not always a 'yes') response.

If you don't want podfic made of your work at all, then telling us this saves us time and saves you from getting repeated messages from different podficcers!

Do you have an example?

Sure do! Here's the statement I currently have in my AO3 profile:

I grant blanket permission for podfics, art and translations, and any other transformative work as long as it involves absolutely no monetary profit or monetary exchange of any kind, or contribution to or use of generative AI. Please link back to the original so I can be thrilled you did it!

Why consider blanket permission?

If you do want podfic made of your work, blanket permission makes it a whole lot more likely a podficcer will choose your work! Because:

Especially for events with quick turnaround times and that include recommendations made to other podficcers for projects, it's often the only way we can get permission in time

It means we can start working on a project as soon as we decide to, rather than having to wait to hear back

Some people are less comfortable reaching out to ask and so will be less willing to podfic works without blanket permission

It can also feel awkward to ask for permission and then not do the podfic for a while (or ever), which can be a mental barrier to reaching out

Blanket permission is so helpful that we even have a whole database of people who have blanket permission so we can find them more easily and an extension that highlights their names in green for 'full speed ahead!'

Podfic makes a writer's work more accessible to audiences that aren't always able to engage with written text, and I personally love it when someone cares about my writing to put in the effort to podfic it. So I want to encourage its creation as much as I can!

No matter what kind of permission you end up being comfortable with, I hope you will consider adding a statement to your AO3 profile, and thanks for reading this pitch!

More resources:

Fanworks permission statement builder by flamingwell Directory of creators with blanket permission (FPS list)

[nova-dracomon]

Draconity: A Draconic Zine || Info Doc

It’s time to celebrate! Let’s come together to create something for the community. Whether you got scales, feathers, fur or otherwise we want to hear from you. What does draconity mean to you?

This zine will be a collection of pieces created by nonhumans and alterhumans about any aspect of draconity they feel called to share. Also, this zine imposes no set definition on what is or isn’t “dragon enough.” If you feel like the label applies, you’re included! 

What Can I Submit?

Both fiction and nonfiction pieces are accepted. As long as what you have in mind fits the theme, it’ll probably be a-ok. 

Off the top of our head, we’re thinking of:

Essays of your personal experiences

Short stories 

Poetry 

Mock advice columns

Alternative covers

Fictional advertisements

Comics 

Recipes

We welcome you to think outside the box and share whatever inspires you about being draconic!

How to Participate

Fill out our google form to submit an entry.

A name you would like the piece attributed to 

Title of your submission

Any content warnings that you feel are necessary for the piece

Any social media handle or personal website you'd like linked in the contributor section

A logo or icon for the contributor section

**If you would like to stay anonymous let us know

Submit the form multiple times for multiple entries. Members of systems are welcome to submit individually or collectively. Please let us know your preference when it comes to attribution.

Once the deadline has passed, these submissions will be put into the zine and it will be posted on itch.io as a free PDF. 

Submissions are due by November 1st, 2025.

Submission Guidelines

Each individual may submit up to 3 works to be featured in Draconity. Comics and multi-image works count as one piece. Individuals within a system may each submit up to 3 works. All work must be your own! Anyone caught plagiarizing or submitting AI-generated work will be barred from entering Draconity and any future zines from us.

Written submissions and multi-part art entries should not exceed 10 pages. Please keep in mind the zine’s pages will be 8.5x11 and entries will be scaled accordingly to fit that size. We request all art submissions to be sent in either .jpg or .png file formats. 

For stories that use multiple different fonts, we will do our best to preserve the general "feel" of your piece but cannot guarantee we will be able to use the exact fonts or sizes due to restrictions in what fonts we have access to, readability and overarching zine style.

Submissions Must Fit the Thematic Criteria of:

About draconity / being draconic

That’s it! Go wild.

As stated in the summary, we will not be policing what is or is not considered “dragon.” If you self-identify as draconic you count! No portfolio or prior zine experience is needed to be included either.

FAQ

Q: Where will the zine be hosted? What will it cost?

A: The zine will be hosted digitally on our itch.io and will be free to download. 

Q: Is there a cap on submissions?

A: There is none, as long as the file doesn’t start getting too big for our computer we’ll do our best! If there are an unprecedented amount of submissions, we may have to delay the release. In the event that happens, we would communicate that through updates on our tumblr.

Q: Can I update my application after it’s been submitted?

A: Yes you may, as long as it’s done before the submission deadline.

Q: Can I rescind my submission?

A: Yes you may, as long as it’s done before the submission deadline. This is because once we begin work on the zine, having to remove content mid-way through would throw off the formatting of everything else after. Please take this into account before submitting. 

Q: Will this zine allow NSFW entries?

A: No, nothing 18+ will be accepted.

Q: Can I submit already completed/published works?

A: Absolutely! It’s ok to submit past work that has been posted to your social media or website. Our only stipulation is that it cannot have been previously featured in another zine. This helps us keep each of our annual Draconity zines unique and distinct from one another.

Q: What is your timeline for the project?

A: Our submission deadline is November 1st, 2025. Our goal is to have the zine live by the end of the year. If something unforeseen happens and we are unable to make that deadline, we will post an update about it on our tumblr.

Q: I have another question!

A: Feel free to reach out to us at our email RuffledGryphgon(@)gmail(.)com with any other questions you have about the zine.

Previous Community Zines:

Modern Draconity

My Gender is [NOT] Human

[sammybirthdaybonanza]

Sammy Birthday Bonanza

What is the Sammy Birthday Bonanza?

This all ships inclusive (wincest too) Sam Winchester birthday appreciation event was born out of a discussion over on the SWJP BB (@samwinjarpadbigbang) Discord server.

This is a casual event; no sign-ups, ship-inclusive and fun, be kind and respectful to one another. 💖

Please keep scrolling if this is not for you. 👋

How and What: A short content creation event for our favorite and much-loved Sam Winchester from Supernatural to flood all platforms with Sam centric content on the weekend of his birthday; May 2nd until May 5th

(We'd like to think Dean would throw him a long weekend party).

Think of everything you make as a birthday give to Sam 🎁

Platform: Tumblr - You are of course free to post on other platforms (e.g. AO3) and put a link back to that in your Tumblr post.

Posting Date: May 2 - May 5 Sam's birthday weekend

Type of Content Welcome: All creations of any kind (except AI generated), such as art, traditional art, fanfiction, ficlets, moodboards, other media, crafting, etc. If it can be created and then posted about on Tumblr, go for it! Please use the following tag for your creations: SammyBB2025

Rules: This is an SPN-themed event that is pro-ship and ship inclusive; all ships allowed (yes wincest too) as well as gen content. Please tag your creations properly for content as per the rules of the platform you're posting on including Tumblr. There are no minimum or maximum word counts, no sign-ups and you can contribute as many creations as you like.

Reblogging: We will reblog all contributions made. Please tag this Tumblr acount in your post and use the SammyBB2025 in your tags. That way we'll see it and can reblog.

⭐️ No AI creations, we are supporting our human content creators 😄.

[centrally-unplanned]

There are two big "AI Art Discourse" events of note recently, which I thought were interesting: ACX's "AI Art Turing Test" and the new paper on "AI Poetry Beating Human Poetry". Both of these I think reveal the shape of "what is AI art for", and also say a lot about how these results were utilized in discourse.

To take the latter first, some academics quizzed people on some poetry and had these results:

We found that AI-generated poems were rated more favorably in qualities such as rhythm and beauty, and that this contributed to their mistaken identification as human-authored. Our findings suggest that participants employed shared yet flawed heuristics to differentiate AI from human poetry: the simplicity of AI-generated poems may be easier for non-experts to understand, leading them to prefer AI-generated poetry and misinterpret the complexity of human poems as incoherence generated by AI.

More human than human poems! This certainly seems impressive - and it is. You couldn't have gotten these results ~5 years ago. But that maybe doesn't mean as much as you might think? Because here is the opening half of the winning "Walt Whitman AI" Poem:

I hear the call of nature, the rustling of the trees, The whisper of the river, the buzzing of the bees, The chirping of the songbirds, and the howling of the wind, All woven into a symphony, that never seems to end. I feel the pulse of life, the beating of my heart, The rhythm of my breathing, the soul's eternal art, The passion of my being, that burns with fervent fire, The urge to live, to love, to strive, to reach up higher. I see the beauty all around, the glory of the earth, The majesty of mountains, the miracles of birth, The wonder of the cosmos, the mysteries of the stars, The poetry of existence, that echoes near and far

This fucking sucks. Straight up 2/10 poem. Did this bitch seriously establish the world's most predictable rhyme scheme only to try to rhyme wind with end? You had one job that you chose for yourself, and you screwed it up! This poem has been written a million times before, and says nothing - the Miley Cyrus lyrics of verse.

The reason this won is, yes, because AI tools have advanced heavily in the past few years. But it is also because it is being tested on a dead art. No one cares about poetry - certainly not the survey respondents:

We asked participants several questions to gauge their experience with poetry, including how much they like poetry, how frequently they read poetry, and their level of familiarity with their assigned poet. Overall, our participants reported a low level of experience with poetry: 90.4% of participants reported that they read poetry a few times per year or less, 55.8% described themselves as “not very familiar with poetry”, and 66.8% describe themselves as “not familiar at all” with their assigned poet. 

"Or less" is doing a LOT of work there; "yeah I read a few nonfiction books a year" oh sure, totally. 90% of these respondents haven't read a poem that wasn't displayed in the end credits of Minecraft since high school. No one does, poetry as a medium is essentially a relic. That isn't an insult to poets, by the way! There is no shame in being a niche. Not everyone can have the reach of hentai doujin artists; the community is small but they get a ton out of it. But you can't take the art of the community and expect that art to hit outside of it.

This survey didn't ask people to evaluate art; it asked people to evaluate their stereotypical impression of an art they don't care about. It was ~600 people hired off a website, they banged it out ASAP and moved on. This is not to invalidate the results; I am not actually claiming that "real" poets would have scored much better? Maybe, I don't know - that just isn't very relevant.

Let's swing to the AI Art Turing Test results to get more into why. Again, AI art is absolutely "art" in the sense that it is able to pass the test handily. You have to be head-in-the-sand at this point to think that AI can't make an impressionist painting a la the "most liked" art in this contest:

I have seen the "well real paintings have physicality this is a jpeg" discourse points and the cope couldn't be more real - 99% of art consumption in the modern world is digital or at least prints, let's get you back to bed grandma. But I did find it pretty funny that Scott noted this AI piece as one he particularly liked:

Because it is nonsensical, right? All that "faded paint", how was it originally painted - just bucket splashes of red and blue? What are those random doors, the random stairs going nowhere on the sides, the vague-nothings engravings? Scott just didn't care about that - he liked the vibe, right? Ancient ruins, epic scale. It isn't a coincidence that the Impressionist art did the best - current AI tools are always impressionist, they have an idea of the vibe and invent the details in between. In Impressionism that is the whole point.

Now the trap is to go "REAL artists can tell because of this or that" because idk, the tools might get better, they might fill in more and more details. The real revelation here is that you don't need the tools to get better - visual art isn't so different from poetry. Most people don't pay attention to it all that much. You see thousands, thousands of pieces of art a week; you probably don't even realize how many. Do you really care if the fading paint makes coherent sense on a billboard ad or a doctor's office wall painting? So much art that is made is "industrial" in this sense - it has no need to be good. Only good enough to fulfill its utilitarian role. In these fields AI absolutely is going to Take Your Jobs in some form, and already is (though imo not a ton of them). And it won't really bother most people. This can go pretty deep - I promise you people are "utilizing" AI porn right now. They are ~appreciating the details~ way more than is typical, the product is working.

All this works until it doesn't, though. When it is an art book by a favourite artist whose vision you want to pour over, learning that all the individual details were just made by AI completely defeats the purpose, right? Imagine reading a book of these poems. Outside of the novelty, "AI is the point" factor you would rather watch infomercials on repeat, I can't imagine a more pointless use of my time. "Reading arbitrary poems" is never fun, regardless of the quality of the poems. Most people don't care about poetry! The reason you care is that you care about the poet, and what they want to say. You read poetry with context, it being inserted with intent into the pages of a manga, at the end of a video game, because you like the artist and follow them on twitter. The quality of the prose isn't more important than that.

Which is a harsh limit for all of these kinds of tests. They essentially aren't testing art, right? You do not ever get paid twenty bucks to sit down and read a dozen poems and score them. That has no bearing on how you would actually ever learn to care about a poem. Which doesn't make AI art useless or anything, more that these tests will very quickly run into their limits of what they can meaningfully tell you. The actual bar is "creating something someone cares about". From that lens, I fully believe hybrid methods that privilege artistic intent are currently working and will improve. But I think for "solo" AI art getting that to work is going to be complicated.

[azrisweek]

During Azris Week 2024, the ship reached 300 fics. Since then, we have reached 650+ fics!! And this doesn’t include all of the wonderful art that’s been created since then. This ship has really grown in the last year, and we’re so happy you’re all here.

This year, we have a few new prompts, as well as some of the most popular from Azris Week 2024. Remember, the prompts are only guidelines - you can create something that fits strictly with the prompt or something that only barely relates. Many of the prompts complement each other, as well as having multiple interpretations. Anything is on the table, but do review the rules below before you post.

Prompts

Day 1: Creature Feature

There are many creatures in Prythian, and many more outside of canon. You can return to the “familiars” idea from last year, or you can create something totally new. Expand your interpretation of who or what a creature is and see where it takes you.

Day 2: Slice of Life

A favorite from Azris Week 2024. So much of this enemies-to-lovers ship is full of strike, pain, and betrayal. But what about the quiet moments?

Day 3: Contact

Another favorite from Azris Week 2024. How do Eris and Azriel communicate? Through letters or texts, maybe, or through heavy gazes and the brush of fingers on exposed skin - and have they always spoken to each other this way?

Day 4: Read Between the Lines

Azriel and Eris are also not known for their straightforward communication, nor are they frequently on the same page together. How do they - or you - read between the lines to see what could be?

Day 5: Favorite Trope/AU

Only one bed? Check. Swordplay as innuendo? Check. Or maybe a love story that takes place in a world neither in Prythian or on planet Earth? Hell yeah.

Day 6: Safe For Work

A challenge to write something sexy or sexually charged that you could read at work. But also - Azriel and Eris are very much NOT safe for their work or many other people’s jobs either. You can combine the two or leave them separate.

Day 7: Free Day

This is self-explanatory.

Rules

1) Be respectful. We’re here to celebrate Azris and appreciate the creations made in their honor. This is a positive, inclusive space which won’t stand for bashing of any kind.

2) Please direct any event-related questions to this account, not to the mods individually.

3) Tag us and use #azrisweek2025 when posting here or on Instagram so that we can reblog/repost. If you are posting a work to AO3, there will be a collection to add it to during the event week.

4) Creations of all kinds are welcome and encouraged! Fics, fanart, mood boards, headcanons, incorrect quotes, edits, playlists, etc. We will not be promoting AI-generated/altered images or fanworks.

5) A caveat to the previous rule. This event won’t tolerate characters being warped to fit heteronormative roles and/or relationship stereotypes. For example (thanks to @cauldronblssd for putting it so clearly) fem Eris or Azriel as queer identities or gender non-conforming characters, yes. Fem Eris or Azriel as a substitute for a straight woman, no. With this in mind, we reserve the right to use our discretion and not engage with content, regardless of how it is tagged, if said content perpetuates harmful stereotypes.

(Header by @acourtofladydeath)