WotC WotC posts generative AI FAQ: "We do not allow the use of generative AI in our art"

[Hussar]

Mitigate and deflect all you want, complain about how 'overplayed' pointing that out is, but hurting people is still bad no matter the degree.

True. Hurting people is bad. But, there are degrees of hurt and degrees of bad. And, there's also the point that sometimes things are in the past, have been resolved, and don't really need to be dragged into EVERY SINGLE conversation, every single time.

Look, all I'm saying is that the unrelenting negativity in the fandom makes me very, very tired and I find that the signal to noise ratio gets to the point where real, true issues, where people are actually, truly getting hurt, get buried under the mountain of people screaming at the top of their lungs about stuff that's terribly important to them, but, at the end of the day, not all that important.

 

[Vaalingrade]

WotC not deliberately including AI art in products, but potentially missing one of their artists doing so, and not publicly shaming said artist . . . that' s "hurting" someone?

Really hard to take you seriously here.

They're not using visual AI art, but are still planning to go forward with generative art people aren't focused on right now. That's the harm. Participating in this buzzword feeding frenzy to reduce jobs in doing harm.

True. Hurting people is bad. But, there are degrees of hurt and degrees of bad. And, there's also the point that sometimes things are in the past, have been resolved, and don't really need to be dragged into EVERY SINGLE conversation, every single time.

Look, all I'm saying is that the unrelenting negativity in the fandom makes me very, very tired and I find that the signal to noise ratio gets to the point where real, true issues, where people are actually, truly getting hurt, get buried under the mountain of people screaming at the top of their lungs about stuff that's terribly important to them, but, at the end of the day, not all that important.

And I'm saying that if you find something wrong and care about it, the answer isn't to just shut up because someone feels 'tired' of it.

 

[Dire Bare]

They're not using visual AI art, but are still planning to go forward with generative art people aren't focused on right now. That's the harm. Participating in this buzzword feeding frenzy to reduce jobs in doing harm.

They have stated they are exploring using AI generative tools TRAINED ON THE ART CATALOG THEY ALREADY OWN. They have not stated for what purpose.

One of the biggest problems of AI-generated art today are tools that are trained on art without the consent or payment of the artists. WotC already owns the art they plan to use. So, this is not a problem here.

The other major issue is the use of AI-generated art in place of commissioning new art created by real people. Will they use this AI-generated art instead of hiring new artists for upcoming D&D products? Unlikely, considered the FAQ we are discussing here and the pushback they have already received when artists they contracted with used AI without WotC's consent.

So . . . what could they use it for? It's all speculation at this point, but my expectation is customer facing generative tools to assist DMs. What if you are a DM running a game for friends, and you want a picture of an NPC for your campaign? You can launch WotC's D&D AI tool TRAINED ON ART WOTC OWNS to generate an image for you. Where is the harm in the use of AI in this case? No artwork was used without consent. No artist was replaced since most DMs don't have an art budget for their personal games.

AI is not evil. AI is a tool that can be used for good or for evil. WotC has not yet shown ANY indication of using AI for evil purposes, to supplant living artists. Might they in the future? Sure, I'll worry about it at that time.

You are participating in the "buzzword feeding frenzy" by assuming AI always equals harm.

 

[Hussar]

And I'm saying that if you find something wrong and care about it, the answer isn't to just shut up because someone feels 'tired' of it.

And I'm saying that the constant stream of vitriol and negativity has resulted in me caring less and less about issues because there can be no nuance or discussion. And even issues that do get resolved are still dragged forward as baggage to beat anyone around the head and shoulders who happens to not hold the same opinion.

My point being, yes, it's good to care about issues. Yes, it's good to discuss those issues and try to formulate some sort of resolution. No, it's not good to endlessly wave the flag of negativity, shutting down any actual conversation in favor of scoring points and poisoning discussion.