Popular iPad design app Procreate is coming out against generative AI, and has vowed never to introduce generative AI features into its products. The company said on its website that although machine learning is a “compelling technology with a lot of merit,” the current path that generative AI is on is wrong for its platform.

Procreate goes on to say that it’s not chasing a technology that is a threat to human creativity, even though this may make the company “seem at risk of being left behind.”

Procreate CEO James Cuda released an even stronger statement against the technology in a video posted to X on Monday.

  • mke@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I’ve no idea where you’re getting these predictions from. I think some of them are fundamentally flawed if not outright incorrect, and don’t reflect real life trends of generative AI development and applications.

    Gonna finish this comment in a few, please wait.

    • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think the big difference is that you seem to think that AI has peaked or is near its peak potential, while I think AI is still just getting started. Will generative AI ever progress beyond being a gimmick? I don’t know, but I suspect it will eventually.

      For example, indies do not have the budget to license expensive actors (e.g. Call of Duty, Cyberpunk 2077), brands (e.g. racing games), and so on. GenAI will not change this. Hell, GenAI will certainly not pay for global advertising.

      Admittedly I had not thought about the licensing and advertising aspect. That’s a bit of a blind spot for me because it’s not something I tend to care about. You’re correct there.

      If hiring them is no longer advantageous due to financial incentives to adopt AI, that’s not their fault for being insufficiently creative.

      I mean, maybe I could have phrased it better, but what else are you gonna do? They have to make a living somehow and if they can’t get hired in the game industry anymore, you gotta help them find somewhere else they can work.

      • mke@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I think the big difference is that you seem to think that AI has peaked or is near its peak potential, while I think AI is still just getting started.

        That’s a fair assessment. I’m still not sure if popular AI tech is on an exponential or a sigmoid curve, but I tend towards the latter. Note, however, that the industry at large is starting to believe it’s just not worth it. Even worse, the entities at the forefront of AI are unsustainable—they’re burning brightly right now, but the cash flow required to keep a reaction on this scale going is simply too large. If you’ve got time and are willing, please check the linked article by Ed (burst damage).

        I mean, maybe I could have phrased it better, but what else are you gonna do?

        My bad, I try to trim down the fat while editing, but I accidentally removed things I shouldn’t. As I said, it’s a nitpick, and I understand the importance of helping those who find themselves unhirable. Maybe it’s just me, but I thought it came across a little mean, even if it wasn’t your intent. I try to gently “poke” folks when I see stuff like this because artists get enough undeserved crap already.

        • Mossy Feathers (She/They)@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yeaaahh… artists are really hard on themselves too. I make art myself, albeit not professionally; and I tend to be extremely hard on myself. I think maybe some of my comments about creativity are the result of my own self-negativity bleeding through.