Yes, one can do that. But, probably because of how content ( in broad meaning) works, it’s not being done. That’s why I’m afraid such rule would mostly cut out the small-fries

I’m afraid they are an exception to what is happening

I am fine with that.

Sure. But wouldn’t such rule mean we dismiss also those who do bring something to the table but just try to get anyone’s attention?

Not if they don't scam people to get that attention.

That is right. But that is not what all AIGen stuff is. If someone creates a cool adventure but uses AIGen to make their fluff box sound like a radio speaker because they lack the skills to make it so, is that a not caring enough?

Exactly. I think that the issue is not black and white

Nope, it isn't.

Cheaters should never be allowed to prosper. It undermines the entire idea that creative work is of value, and will inevitably lead to a day when artists are seen as as much of a piece of scum on someone's shoe as cashiers are.

That’s great. And it should be encouraged. But what about modern+ settings?

I’m afraid that’s a very high bar ATM

I think we are way past the point when creative work is enough

So you're arguing so hard to replace artists because you already don't value them?

It's meant to be a high bar forever.

"Generative AI" is a scam perpetrated by people who hate artists, while envying their capacity to create art, while also not understanding what art really is. Period.

Oh definitely, it’s not a universal solution. Just figured I’d mention a less obvious option that has helped me out before

That is a straw man.

I never said banning non open source. I equated corporate “AI” with the corporate practice of stealing open source projects.

Well, there’s plenty of AI that isn’t “corporate” AI, and that is itself open. So the distinction you’re drawing isn’t going to put all AI on one side and all non-AI on the other side.

Heck, there’s plenty of “corporate” RPGs that are near-universal staples of the hobby. D&D is owned by Hasbro, along with a lot of its tools.

I would propose a rule like this:

Posts solely containing AI-generated content are banned. Posts that contain AI-generated content as part of a larger piece or project that is human-created are okay.

This prevents the potential problem of people just posting their AI-generated character portraits and the feed getting flooded by those (which is the reason why I personally block multiple AI art communities), but does not prevent people who used AI generation in part to put together an adventure or something like that from sharing their work.

You closed with “No AI.” It doesn’t feel like a straw man. It’s fine to say no corporate AI but that might be even harder to single out.

I’m personally looking into domain specific fine tunes of small, open source models that can compete with larger models in at least one small area - specifically in roleplaying, though my interest is creating a chat bot to facilitate group gaming, not generating systems or art.

No. For one I don’t believe it will replace artists. What I expect is that we will never be able to hold wotc, hasbro, etc to this standard. Which means they’ll have an even higher advantage against one-person creators
The artists working for big ones will be using AIGen to speed up their work. Same as using search engines to find info and references
Creators for which the AIGenned cover is enough, won’t commission a real artist anyway
I’m afraid that such rule here ( meaning we are social network, not the shop) would skew the scale towards the big ones - they’ll be getting more coverage, even here

I think https://piefed.zip/post/511096#comment_1614098 also addresses this point