A stronger stance on AI-assisted content

Initially, I have stayed relatively silent and occasionally enjoyed legitimately AI art or related to it, if only because it would do something with unpopular works or characters I cared about. However, I've seen the recent news of the intro of Secret Invasion, a mainstream Marvel show that is part of the immensely popular Marvel Cinematic Universe and has already accumulated over 50 wicks on this wiki, being made by an AI. We also have covers that use SpongeBob SquarePants characters to cover songs, which I know aren't as tropable, but this stuff has definitely spread to the point some of these have millions of views, plus they show up in search results and recommendations. These developments led me to believe we need to take a more hardline stance, and that includes the whole site.

We had a discussion that started here. An intereting post there was "What it boils down to me is that tropes are patterns, and if an AI has enough knowledge of these stories to implement these patterns, then that work is inherently tropeworthy. The content is still there... who cares that a robot made it?" I agree with the first point, but... I and many others do. There is no artist. There is an algorithm that compiles others' work. You just need money to buy a high-end GPU or pay off a subscription service, instead of requiring work or talent. TV Tropes has always been for creators and what they make. The consensus we've decided on as of then was "AI-made works are tropable, but software that uses AI to make works is not", which is fair in theory, but nine months have escalated the situation and morality of the case.

We also disallow hate speech and child porn (the former can be occasionally written about as some works have historical importance but are also sometimes deleted, the latter is forbidden, but we also have extensive venues to discuss them), which do have tropes but are definitely easy to agree they're morally wrong, though they are also more directly harmful towards specific groups. Nevertheless, harm exists, even if it's indirect and more minor (artists losing work and popularity, consumers being deprived of new content with human-made beauty).

The strongest at least somewhat viable option would be to ban pages on AI works, maybe also works that clearly have AI-assisted content, and ban threads designed for sharing AI works and art. It would help prevent it from making artists smaller and clogging the image server. I understand this could end up scaring some people off of us, but we have already banned other material that can be easily decided to be immoral and certain groups of people are into. Newgrounds and Danbooru disallow AI uploads, which IMO we could do as well.

However, if this will not pass (which I'd understand, after all, it's not truly comparable to the outright damaging stuff we've forbidden so far, plus it could result in some pages like the Marvel franchise feeling incomplete or censored), we should at least add a clear profile option to hide all AI content. Any work that contains AI art should be tickable on the page type to tag it as AI-assisted. Any example that links to a work that is AI-based or contains AI assistance should be hidden if you tick the option. All threads with them should also be hidden from the forums. Pixiv has the option to hide all AI works, which I've started using after realising this stuff is awful. People who tick the "No AI art" option should also get an exclusive badge for supporting artists (similar to the Ad-Free badge) that stays active as long as the option is ticked (but may be hidden from the forums if the people don't want it). And before anyone implies it's enough to put in the troper page or the profile features, I agree, but it's all too easy to say that you're against something while still taking part in it. As such, loyalty needs to be enforced and clear, potentially by coding. I'm positive that many artists would appreciate this site for having fans who are loyal and don't accept AI art.

At the very least, we should have the option to have the page be tagged for AI assistance, but instead of hiding it, the page and all subpages should have a banner that says "This page details a work that was made with AI assistance. Some people oppose them for various reasons, but they do technically have tropes. Remember that TV Tropes cares about the artists and exercise freedom in the media you take part in." with some bot icons. That way, people can know whether to stay away and be happy that we are loyal to the artists.

Note that some works will likely be in a gray area. For example, Persona 3 had its first few versions and many spin-offs released before AI art was a thing, but the port to PC and 9th-gen consoles had locations from Portable upscaled by AI. While I and others definitely think that is lame (like in this review), it's not the only problem with that remaster and it doesn't invalidate the original versions, plus upscaling is not exactly the same as trying to make new images. Therefore, banning P3 or marking it as AI-assisted for only having this in one version would not be a sensible decision. Another good point was "At least for Sonic Destruction Penny was the one who've put prompts into the site and after it retruned the script, inserted a couple minor details. Plus the actual reading is filled by the crew's adlibbing and commentary, so it's sorta still a SnapCube's work." In such gray areas, I think we ultimately have to rely on people deciding whether they'll "JUST SAY NO".

I also know there's been some discussion about people using AI to assist themselves with writing TV Tropes examples and descriptions. However, such an action has not seen success and it would likely be harder to track for various reasons, like the AI not knowing enough the work and making various mistakes. Nevertheless, such a discussion should likely be separate.

Edited by Piterpicher on Jun 22nd 2023 at 7:03:46 PM

for reference the last topic we had on AI

I don't think a "hide the content" system would work right now. Like, that doesn't seem possible with the current wiki software.

The only other thing I really have to say on the subject right now (I'll wait for others to file in), is that Hate Speech isn't banned in the way you think. We have no policy where works that contain hate speech are disallowed. If you're referring to Stonetoss, that was technically cut due to our issue troping it objectively, not because of the shitty political messages. See this entire thread.

So the only thing that's outright banned is porn... and technically, that is only because of Google, not the wiki taking a moral stance.

Edited by WarJay77 on Jun 22nd 2023 at 12:56:57 PM

This feels extreme. Really extreme.

Firstly, the examples you've listed of places that ban AI art were sites that were made to showcase works of art and such, which is understandable as to why they'd ban them. TVT is completely different. While art may be involved, first and foremost this website is about tropes. After that, the stories themselves. Art doesn't play that much of a role besides being a page image and very, very rarely being troped.

Also, this feels like a really big moral guardian and self righteous approach. Getting a whole badge over simply ticking something on? That's pretty much pressuring everyone to toggle it on.

Lastly, AI art, after the initial blast, hasn't really affected us artists that much. I've soon found that AI is so limited in what it can do. It can create awe inspiring things, but that's it. No actual sketch. No pencil like drawing. Just plastic perfectness. It is still in its infancy, and we don't really know how it will pan out.

Edited by CardboardBot on Jun 22nd 2023 at 8:20:13 PM

That's also a good point. I mean, I'm staunchly against using AI content for the wiki, I think it's a terrible idea in the long run. But right now, the robots aren't making anything that could genuinely stand up against real creators; their works are just nonsensical attempts to replicate patterns, and they can be troped, I think, without too much issue as long as it's:

• A publicly available "work" (i.e., not something someone randomly generated but didn't post anywhere)
• Disclosed that an AI wrote or at least helped write it

Edited by WarJay77 on Jun 22nd 2023 at 1:23:16 PM

And as AI continues to improve and works by AI get more and more indistinguishable from works by human creators, the stance that they are somehow not "real" works looks sillier and sillier.

Like I said, this stuff is hitting the mainstream and other really popular places. A big corporation like Marvel used an AI to make an intro for their major show. A lot of comments pointed out how it looks awful, but how many average consumers who watch the recent Marvel stuff are able to look through it?

And yes, while it is still far from replacing the human artists, it will never have soul. There is still a form of beauty to human stuff and robots will never replicate it (but I guess as someone who uses my heart to decide on what I like, can't really explain it). Above all though, there is a beauty to human work altogether, which is we have Doing It for the Art, Development Heaven, and other such pages. People who value it should have no obstructions to appreciate it or have something that doesn't have it be lumped with them.

I guess the badge idea was slightly moralizing. We can skip that. In theory, an option to hide content can be coded, but such a major code change would likely to be too difficult and costly. A box that should be ticked for those pages and a banner would be much easier. The whole ban would not require any coding, but I do agree that would likely be extreme (plus the censorship or incomplete info argument).

Edited by Piterpicher on Jun 22nd 2023 at 7:33:33 PM

I mean, I like works to be made with soul, too... but does that mean we also shouldn't be troping works that are clearly just made by a soulless corporation to make money? It sucks, but "heart and soul" don't really matter when it comes to creating a story, and we've learned that long before AI ever entered the picture because big businesses gonna big business.

For example, with the Marvel example, you're concerned over the use of AI but aren't really acknowledging that the issue there is not just the fact that a company used an AI, it's that this extremely rich brand decided to use an AI instead of hiring a creator. That is where the lack of soul comes from. It's not the use of an AI itself that's harmful, it's the fact that Marvel decided to turn to a robot instead of just paying an actual human to do it. And that's not the AI's fault.

Someone playing around with an AI to make something funny, though, embracing the nonsense for comedy (like with Harry Potter and the Portrait of What Looked Like a Large Pile of Ash)? I think that does have soul because the human element went in with a goal that's more than "make money, fuck workers". You can't even make money from fanfic, so that creator wasn't doing anything harmful.

Edited by WarJay77 on Jun 22nd 2023 at 1:36:49 PM

Fair point. And I will admit that I sometimes used an AI to make memes to laugh at what ridiculous captions it'd come up with (though memes have a very low barrier of entry and often aren't tropable).

Edited by Piterpicher on Jun 22nd 2023 at 7:38:09 PM

Tbh, claiming that something using synthographic software is any less human is an inane argument. Until we have full-on sentient robots, it's just another software and medium.

Asking for a ban on generative content is like asking for a ban on everything made with Photoshop or acrylics.

Yeah, this feels like a massive overreaction.

You're free to boycott works that incorporate AI elements, but TV Tropes as a website doesn't need to do so. If a mainstream work by Marvel Studios uses a bit of AI art in its opening, that's not a reason to ban the whole show from having a page.

I can see a trivia item for works made wholly or in part with AI working, for what it's worth.

Coulda sworn we had one of those. Maybe it's still languishing in TLP.

That's a Useful Notes page, I think

Yeah, I think it got launched as UsefulNotes.AI Generated Artwork IIRC

Anyway, somewhat back to topic, to be honest I don't vibe with Piter's proposal in the OP. While I'm always iffy when it comes to using AI in works, especially those as mainstream and rich as Marvel, like what other users pointed out, the proposal read as a massive over-reaction to the aforementioned company deciding to use AI to make their latest show's intro to presumably save costs or whatever and that it came off as quite Moral Guardian-y. After all, if it isn't porn or Stonetoss, any work is legible to get a page, even if lacks soul and/or some of it was AI-generated. In fact, if it wasn't for Google, we likely would've have pages for porn as they're probably tropable regardless of your moral stances on it.

And for a Trivia that's about works using AI in it in some capacity or are entirely AI-generated, I can get behind that.

Edited by Cutegirl920fire on Jun 22nd 2023 at 7:24:15 AM

e: (that thread was rather more general initially)

As mentioned in other threads, still for allowing AI content because it's still content.

Edited by Amonimus on Jun 22nd 2023 at 9:15:56 PM

That's a different discussion, technically. This is about troping works made by AI, not using AI content on the wiki.

If this is how it is, I'll accept making a Trivia item. At least it'll help inform the people.

Edited by Piterpicher on Jun 25th 2023 at 7:03:46 PM

I will admit, I'm kind of iffy on a "Uses synthography" Trivia item for two reasons:

• It's giving a medium special treatment. There's no trivia item I know of that's like "this work uses Photoshop!" or "This work uses canvases!".
• How much generative art would need to be used to qualify for the trivia item? Things like Photoshop's content aware tool are very commonplace, but work in a pretty similar way. Would those allow for this Trivia to be added? What if generative art is known by word of god to have been used for inspiration, but not directly in the final work. Would that be noted? There's a lot of variation and edge cases that would need to be defined as acceptable for not for the trivia.

I don't think Photoshop or canvases can truly compare to letting an AI do things. A human still needs to selects areas, copy/paste things by hand, or otherwise perform actions in the process of artwork or other work. Here's how I'd see it:

• If you chop a tree with an axe, a human chopped it.
• If you chop a tree with a chainsaw, a human chopped it.
• If you chop a tree with a remote-controlled mech, a human technically didn't chop it, but has done input from start to finish to theoretically pass as human work.
• If you enter coordinates for a mech to chop all trees (or anything that it interprets as a tree) within a specific radius, a human didn't chop them and hasn't done any noticeable work that would classify it as being done by a human. Just pushed enough buttons at the start for a machine to do everything for you and then waited for that to happen. Since the human hasn't done any process, it cannot classify as chopping by a human, though human work was done in bot construction, AI programming (though that all happened before the mech was given), and coordinate planning.
• (Of course, things are different with something like programming which pretty much relies on making a program and then testing whether the machine does the intended process and changing the code if it doesn't, but that was just an example for a known physical work)

As for what would qualify, I'd say if the page was called AI Assisted Work and included both things that make it into the final product and inspiration, it'd be fine.

Edited by Piterpicher on Jun 25th 2023 at 8:50:31 PM

Often, once you get out of the basic, "prompt jockey" level of doing synthography, generative art does tend to involve more manual things, whether in the form of photobashing multiple generations together, creating models or extensions with open-source programs, or creating something to use as a base for image-to-image generations.

It does? Most of the AI stuff I've seen is just what's given raw after the prompt... Admittedly, if what is said here is true, Secret Invasion (2023)'s intro utilized additional work in animation and art direction, which does complicate things a bit.

Edited by Piterpicher on Jun 25th 2023 at 8:58:46 PM

Yeah, while I agree it's worth being wary about AI content going forward, it's worth noting that, according to those behind Secret Invasion, the AI wasn't used to substitute jobs or take creative control from creators...it was just used as a tool by artists as much as autofill in Photoshop and other things of that ilk are used.

Edited by Ravok on Jun 25th 2023 at 2:00:58 AM

Yeah, there are forms of AI that just do minor jobs to repair and perfect things, and AI is also not yet at the point where it can replicate itself and perform jobs without human input. Not all AI is the powerful "can make an entire painting without help" kind, and it's important to keep the nuance in mind.

Something that Corridor Digital has been demonstrating with a lot of their videos is that while they were exploring a lot of AI assisted tools there was still a lot of prep work they personally had to engage with for the final results, an AI animated sequence of "Anime Rock Paper Scissors" still required them to stage the camera work, costuming and actor performances before having the AI program animate it accordingly. When it comes to the TV Tropes sphere of influence we are trying to observe and catalog the media that is presented to us and avoid passing judgement on the content or circumstances of its creation, things such as policies against porn is more for advertising and tonal concerns rather than moral stances (excessive details on the Panty Shot page all grouped together didn't settle right and caused examples on page to be removed, but the trope page still exists and work pages can still list examples). Likewise behind-the-scenes / marketing / Do Not Do This Cool Thing issues on media like Cuties is still acknowledged through ymmv and trivia pages.