Make AI artist qualifiers necessary for AI artists

+1 for Marking them with implications, and I think it is currently the best route we can go for in this case, considering the pros we get can outweigh the cons nnt mentioned.

nonamethanks said:

...
I don't mind taking care of the implications, but I'm afraid it would cause people to start creating tons of tags in advance without any upload just to discourage people from uploading from any obscure obvious AI prompt account they come across, and I don't know what volume of requests we'd get.

We could put a quick warning note on artist creation page to only create a new artist if you have a post you want to up.

+1. Agreed, this makes everything much easier, with pros outweighing the cons.

I'm actually surprised that creating artist wikis without uploading their art isn't already considered vandalism to a degree. Well, maybe not vandalism, but somewhat pointless. Creating artist wikis with the sole intention of false flagging them as ai generated content definitely would cross that line. Plus it would be easy enough to see if someone is spamming artist wiki creations would it not?

Grahf said:

I'm actually surprised that creating artist wikis without uploading their art isn't already considered vandalism to a degree. Well, maybe not vandalism, but somewhat pointless.

I disagree. I often do that with the artists whose art I don't want to upload to danbooru at the moment (usually those that I am highly confident will be deleted or take long time in the queue) - to have convenient links between twitter/pixiv/other sites.

Grahf said:

I'm actually surprised that creating artist wikis without uploading their art isn't already considered vandalism to a degree. Well, maybe not vandalism, but somewhat pointless.

?????? you have a very strange idea of what vandalism is. sometimes i decide halfway through tagging an upload "yeah actually i dont feel like it anymore."

there wouldnt be a point in deleting unused artist entries because what if someone else wants to upload something from that artist in the future?
would we just force them to go through the hassle of refinding all their links?

To clarify, I said that it wasn't vandalism but did seem pointless, at least before the possibility of adding artists and falsely labelling them as AI users was a thing. It's not like I begrudge anyone for making artist wikis, but like, why? If you're going to make one and not upload anything from the person, then it just seems like busywork.

I'm also not saying to delete artist wikis that have no posts attached to them. I was never advocating for that, so I'm not sure why it came up.

Anyways, this is veering off-topic now. I'll admit that I probably chose my words poorly and could've clarified.

Grahf said:

It's not like I begrudge anyone for making artist wikis, but like, why? If you're going to make one and not upload anything from the person, then it just seems like busywork.

I get what you mean by "pointless". I just want to add that it's not always done because the person doesn't want to upload anything from the artists. I've done this a few times where I have things to upload, but just can't do it immediately either because I don't have the time or I need to take care of something else first. And since I've already gathered their accounts (and probably found a proper name for them) it's safer to do it now, in case the artist deletes some of their accounts or someone else decides to create a low-effort "twitter1234567" tag for them. Plus I always check the accounts of a new artist, but rarely for existing ones, I can't guarantee that I'll remember to verify their entry if they've received one before I got to them.

That said, ai users should definitely be treated separately and I agree that making entries for them in advance should be discouraged.

Can ai booru make a data base like we have yande.re gelbooru can appear the ai booru icon, for posts can be this done for artists? If is registered on ai booru can appear a different color or something in his name in the creation page? I don't know if this is possible but is an idea, to work with an existing and extensive database.

Imagine_Breaker said:

Can ai booru make a data base like we have yande.re gelbooru can appear the ai booru icon, for posts can be this done for artists? If is registered on ai booru can appear a different color or something in his name in the creation page? I don't know if this is possible but is an idea, to work with an existing and extensive database.

aibooru also hosts artists that have dabbled with AI but still draw normal stuff, so there's no way to filter pure AI artists from people who sometimes post it and other times draw normal art, and that doesn't even touch the possibility of people vandalizing aibooru (which has a much smaller userbase than us, and thus, less eyes to spot vandalism).

What about a special status that could only be added to an artist's wiki by approver or above level accounts? And there could be a thread where people could post saying "this person says they use exclusively AI gen on their pixiv/twitter/dA profile" and then it gets checked, confirmed, and someone with the authority to do so adds the status?

The status would prevent uploads from accounts linked to that artist via the wiki.

Granted, that starts sounding like more work, not less.

nonamethanks said:

aibooru also hosts artists that have dabbled with AI but still draw normal stuff, so there's no way to filter pure AI artists from people who sometimes post it and other times draw normal art, and that doesn't even touch the possibility of people vandalizing aibooru (which has a much smaller userbase than us, and thus, less eyes to spot vandalism).

Sadly you're right, then can work using sugiki as example all post from this artist are deleted its close to 100 post actually are 92 we can take actions based on the artist works, and add an alert in the upload page "known as ai artist please check " only because are a several post here, but maybe tomorrow he leave the ai and start upload normal works and this need be done for an aprover or above like Grahf was saying this because aprovers or above check the flagged post and delete ai generated post they saw can create an alert because there has been a precedent
Why no add a artist who only had 1 or 3 post because some people uploaded by error but if we had 10 or more post tagged as ai of the same artist we can saw a tendency and actions can be taken.

Thread bump. I still think this is a very good idea, at least in concept, and people generally seem to agree. I think right now we are stuck on how to implement things.

I think going with implications + check thread would be the better solution due to the lowered chances of vandalism and people jumping to conclusions. However, the main hang-up here is with artists that switched to AI for god knows what reason, as not all their art is AI. But it would be great for warding off accidental uploads of the 100% cases like with rewin (nobabys perfect).

So is there a shot of this all coming to fruition? I would really like to see such be implemented, and I think many others do too.

Another bump.

I'm sure that a changeover with new functions and changes to the API is more robust for the long term, but to improve the upload process on the shorter term (and with my recent mishap with post #7641497) I do want to have at least some kind of solution moving forward.

As mentioned above, finding out where the line is between ai-assisted and ai-generated is a whole discussion on itself involving close examination of images and throwing evidence back and forth. But we can make a first step by putting the ai-assisted discussion aside for now and start with targeting the 100% artists prompters that proudly display the AI tag in their profiles.

So just adding a second artist tag to these artist entries (like banned_artist) should be a great warning to uploaders and is something that we can implement today. This can then be used as a base for further improvements down the line or even reverted by simply nuking it. A warning tag instead of a more specific AI tag also opens up other possibilities like adding repost accounts (pokoooo_(fartsonist)) or even impersonation accounts like with the current urakata_(uracata) situation (Context: Tweet 1 Tweet 2)

Finally, with a simple warning tag instead of a complete block, it still allows uploading of older works of an artist before they switched over to AI.
The warning tag does just one thing: Warning an uploader to doublecheck things before uploading, which is all we really want.

With this in mind I would like to propose:

Edit: small typo

BUR #26806 has been rejected.

create implication rainot -> artist_warning
create implication zero_(qingsongzero) -> artist_warning
create implication lilium_(lilydisease) -> artist_warning
create implication pokoooo_(fartsonist) -> artist_warning

First three are 100% ai-generated artists, the last one is a filthy editor/reposter.
Just a small list for now to see what people think.

Thoughts?

emusheret6

Caught here : https://x.com/BuffGigas/status/1727041461190045807

How do you handle people who start with full AI generation and then branch out into other techniques?

GabrielWB said:

BUR #26806 has been rejected.

create implication rainot -> artist_warning
create implication zero_(qingsongzero) -> artist_warning
create implication lilium_(lilydisease) -> artist_warning
create implication pokoooo_(fartsonist) -> artist_warning

First three are 100% ai-generated artists, the last one is a filthy editor/reposter.
Just a small list for now to see what people think.

Thoughts?

This won't work for the last one at a technical level because implications for empty tags are automatically removed.

rencker said:

How do you handle people who start with full AI generation and then branch out into other techniques?

The tag artist warning should ideally be considered a warning. An "Are you sure you want to continue?" confirmation box. Nothing more, nothing less.
So an user is still free to upload their stuff, but they should be aware that they have to properly check everything and that the upload will be watched with a LOT more scrutiny by other users.
We could even consider that all uploads with this tag should go through the Moderation Queue by default.

If an artist starts as an AI-artist but later on starts uploading normal stuff, it can just be uploaded.
The uploader should ideally leave a comment below the post to warn other about this change.
If the artist then moves forward and becomes a proper artist, we could have a discussion in a dedicated thread and consider removing the implication.
All with proper proof of course, none of that "it feels/doesn't feel like AI" bullshit.

But again, this is all preliminary. Feel free to share thoughts or opinions.

nonamethanks said:

This won't work for the last one at a technical level because implications for empty tags are automatically removed.

Well, ain't that a bummer. pokoooo_(fartsonist) just keeps screwing me over huh.

We could, as a TEMPORARY stopgap measure, use a meaningless trash post (like post #5719971 for example) and add all the artist tags to it just to make the tags not empty.
Maybe even add status:banned so that the post is only accessible for Approver+

All bulk updates would then need follow the format:

update id:5719971 -> artist_name
create implication artist_name -> artist_warning

Just until something more permanent is implemented. Or would that be too yank?

This basically the same thing as having artist tags imply the ai-generated tag, but with extra steps.

I think it would be better to just add an *_(ai_artist) qualifier to known AI artists. This is easier to do, it doesn't require any additional work or functionality, and it shows up in Translate Pixiv Tags. That way you find out before you even get to the upload page.

I don't like the name "artist warning". I have no idea what that means without reading a (long) wiki. People already routinely ignore much clearer warnings like the big red pixel-perfect duplicate or AI generated warnings beneath the picture on the upload page. Including builders who should know better. I guarantee you people will skip right past something totally nondescriptive like "artist warning".

And I don't like the fact this is a fake artist tag. Artist tags are for the artist. They're not for fake "do not upload this artist" warnings. If anything it should be a meta tag. The main reason it's not a meta tag is because (aside from artist tags not being able to imply meta tags) then it would be buried at the bottom of the tag list. The original purpose for meta tags was to make important tags like this stand out. But instead it had the opposite effect where we flooded them with unimportant tags then shoved them down to the bottom of the tag list, so now they can't be used for important things like "this post is by an AI artist".

Works for me.

The only reason I went the artist warning route is because an extra tag was preferred by the majority in this thread.
Also, handling it the same technical way as banned artist should be possible. It's also an artist tag and it works perfectly with Translate Pixiv Tags.
And a broader more generic warning sign would allow some flexibility if we encounter some vagueness later on with artist moving to, or leaving from creating AI works.
I do not want *_(ai-artist) to become a free pass for people to blindly flag posts without looking at the context.

Regardless, I'm happy either way just as long something is done. The sooner the better.