AI generated assets and disclosure

[pioruns]

I feel this request as psychological or political, but not technical. This reminds me of long gone discussions when some people didn't want to use apps developed with Turbo Pascal or compiled by some given compiler.

Given this and other topics that are against AI usage but never really told why they are against AI usage except that it's "controversial", I decided to never disclose anything about the tools I use during development again. Be it programming, be it some text I write, be it some images I produce. I know what work I did, I know what part of that work is mine, I know that what I publish doesn't violate the terms and conditions on which my work is based. I use publicly available state of the art tools to be efficient in what I do. Tools develop and change over time and make you more productive. Be it coding, translating or drawing. Back then it was Turbo Pascal, today it's modern IDE's with code completion that write half of the code for you - and AI.

Well done with your decision. Let others argue among themselves, while you are fully within your rights to use the tools available, with the proper licenses, to create and share your artwork.

For example, open-source or other free-for-commercial-use image generation tools, including AI, are no different from other open-source graphical tools like GIMP. How you choose to use them is entirely up to you. I agree that you are not obligated to disclose anything about the tools you use.

[mmmPI]

I don't expect Wube to police the tag. They don't police any tags currently, and this new one would be no different. I don't expect it to catch every AI generated asset, but it'd be helpful for people wishing to avoid it or people who wish to experience it.

Repeating it doesn't make it more true, it will be misleading, a pain to maintain and monitor for modders that don't want to have to do extra work to cater to particular segment of the players that is both the most extreme kind of picky on the matter and unwilling to spend the extra few minutes their condition require to read the mods description to make sure they don't download something they are psychologically alergic to.

If you had any idea how assest in mods are very often shared, and the work of several person that can end up in another one's mod, you wouldn't be asking for something that in practice makes little sense, i can't believe modders will try to search for the whole chain of people who contributed and ask them their process to make sure they can put or not the proper label.

Those saying they disclose the tools they use, thank you! This is a kind thing to do.

Thank you, will continue to do in the description of my mods, because i think it helps people to understand how tools works and what is the work that was done for the mod, what players can expect, i believe it makes more sense than a simplistic label that i wouldn't use, if your mod is 90% code that took month to develop and you only needed a visual for a detail of the thing and you used AI and liked it, it's not the same as if you publish only AI reskin of something and no code, or if you used and AI to write the math function you needed in lua. I don't think it's kind to help people entrench themselves in irrationnal behavior.

Like I said, i don't expect this tag to be policed by Wube. Consider it an act of kindness, and an easy out for people who otherwise might be upset when they get a few hours into your mod and are unpleasantly surprised by the content.

if you see the thumbnail is AI just don't click it ... if you don't see it's AI and you learn afterward, that's like unwatching a movie where they used CGI imo, it's ridiculous.

[mmmPI]

Well done with your decision. Let kids fight between thenselves, while you are totally within your right to use tools available, with appropriate licenses, to create and share your artwork.
For example, open source or other free for commercial use image generation tools like AI etc, are no different from other open source graphical tools like GIMP. It's up to you how you want to use them. I agree with you that you are not obliged to disclose anything about your tools.

I can see the attempt at derailing the topic by needlessly calling people kids which is probably best avoided, i believe your second point is more interesting, i think explaining how AI works in practice can help address some concern that may arise because it's new and awareness doesn't spread at a uniform pace for everyone. But i understand it misses the point when it's more of a philosophical thing that some players have decided to be "against" and that in such case it shouldn't put the burden to justify their works onto everyone because some people uses AI and other don't like it. If you think your work speak for itself, why bother taking time to try and justify it right ? ^^

[pioruns]

I can see the attempt at derailing the topic by needlessly calling people kids which is probably best avoided, i believe your second point is more interesting, i think explaining how AI works in practice can help address some concern that may arise because it's new and awareness doesn't spread at a uniform pace for everyone. But i understand it misses the point when it's more of a philosophical thing that some players have decided to be "against" and that in such case it shouldn't put the burden to justify their works onto everyone because some people uses AI and other don't like it. If you think your work speak for itself, why bother taking time to try and justify it right ? ^^

Thanks for your feedback. I actually rewrote my post and removed the mention of "kids", my apologies. I focused more on the point about using available tools with proper licences and letting your work speak for itself.

I agree with you that explaining how AI works in practice can help address some concerns, but ultimately, when some people are philosophically against AI, it should not fall on the creator to justify their work.