Traveller, TAS, and AI

I think one major difference between stock photography, which can easily be licensed, and artificially recreated pictures, is that the former is static, and any legal issues reside with the licensor.

Whereas, the ones recreated by artificial intelligence programmes are somewhat dynamic, and could be hard to pin down if any copyright entails.
 
If it is your creativity, then why are you arguing with me over someone else's policy?
If it is a computer doing your creativity for you, then selling it is the Participation Trophy mentality.
I don't sell my stuff because I don't consider it professional enough to sell. When I have sold art, it was because people came to me and asked.
That doesn't mean I don't put my ideas out there.
I don't sell product, I have not even tried to publish anything that I have created. it is for personal use. I don't have or use AI art or writing. I am looking at submitting articles for inclusion in the Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society, just struggling with the writing of it.

My argument is with the notion that because I lack the skills to express my ideas that makes me any less creative in my thoughts.
 
I think one major difference between stock photography, which can easily be licensed, and artificially recreated pictures, is that the former is static, and any legal issues reside with the licensor.

Whereas, the ones recreated by artificial intelligence programmes are somewhat dynamic, and could be hard to pin down if any copyright entails.

Copyright is something you want to be on firm ground for. Look at the lawsuits decades later aimed at Men At Work and Led Zepellin.
 
I don't sell product, I have not even tried to publish anything that I have created. it is for personal use. I don't have or use AI art or writing. I am looking at submitting articles for inclusion in the Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society, just struggling with the writing of it.

My argument is with the notion that because I lack the skills to express my ideas that makes me any less creative in my thoughts.

Well then, why are you arguing with me about that?
I said, if you didn't make it or license it, don't sell it.
You say you don't sell it, and are thus in the same boat as I am. Not publishing and not running afoul of Mongoose' AI policy.
I always aspired to be a fiction writer. As a fiction writer, I'm pretty good at writing policy manuals.

If you got something else out of my post than that, then you need to go back and reread it for comprehension.
 
Last edited:
I think of the process to create something (let's use a Traveller supplement as this example because... it makes sense) like a foot race. There are some people who can run the whole thing themselves. (Come up with the idea, write it out, create the images, etc.) There are some people who can only run part of it and therefore would need to make it a relay of partners (or commissioned contributors) to get across the finish line.

Right now, we just don't want anybody to be allowed to hop on a motorcycle at any point. Even if "they just used it as a tool" it's against the spirit and, ultimately, the race organizers (Mongoose) can choose to allow it or not. Regardless of whether the crowd seems to be enjoying the spectacle of a motorcycle.
 
I think of the process to create something (let's use a Traveller supplement as this example because... it makes sense) like a foot race. There are some people who can run the whole thing themselves. (Come up with the idea, write it out, create the images, etc.) There are some people who can only run part of it and therefore would need to make it a relay of partners (or commissioned contributors) to get across the finish line.

Right now, we just don't want anybody to be allowed to hop on a motorcycle at any point. Even if "they just used it as a tool" it's against the spirit and, ultimately, the race organizers (Mongoose) can choose to allow it or not. Regardless of whether the crowd seems to be enjoying the spectacle of a motorcycle.
It's more stealing someone else's car than hopping on a motorcycle, but apart from that I agree completely. and I think judging by these two forum threads most people DON'T enjoy the spectacle :D
 
I think of the process to create something (let's use a Traveller supplement as this example because... it makes sense) like a foot race. There are some people who can run the whole thing themselves. (Come up with the idea, write it out, create the images, etc.) There are some people who can only run part of it and therefore would need to make it a relay of partners (or commissioned contributors) to get across the finish line.

Right now, we just don't want anybody to be allowed to hop on a motorcycle at any point. Even if "they just used it as a tool" it's against the spirit and, ultimately, the race organizers (Mongoose) can choose to allow it or not. Regardless of whether the crowd seems to be enjoying the spectacle of a motorcycle.
The part that I am objecting to is that it is being implied that since I cannot finish the last 25% of the race, I never ran the race, and shouldn't be recognized as a participant in the race.
 
It's not disingenuous, it is what the small publishers themselves stated outright as fact. The cost of a human artist adds an overhead they can not afford.
If the human artist wants to work for free then great, but that means somewhere there is an artist out of work.

Artist A - I will charge you six shiny gloarties
Artist B - I will do it for free

Artist A starves to death...

Small publisher, "I will only make enough money to feed myself, if I pay an artist I will starve to death",

Artist A still doesn't get paid.

Someone always suffers.
 
I am so sick of the "Starving Artist" BS. If you can't make a living as an artist find something that you can make a living at. And no I am not just talking since the AI craze, this BS has been going of for a very long time.

In my first career I was a manual Architectural Draftsman, Drafting is an art form, "So support me financially because I don't want to move with the times". BS all of it. I had to learn AutoCAD just to continue on with my career. Every profession has growing pains. You are starving because you want to, if you didn't want to you would find a different career.

If you are good enough you wouldn't be starving.
 
I am so sick of the "Starving Artist" BS. If you can't make a living as an artist find something that you can make a living at. And no I am not just talking since the AI craze, this BS has been going of for a very long time.

In my first career I was a manual Architectural Draftsman, Drafting is an art form, "So support me financially because I don't want to move with the times". BS all of it. I had to learn AutoCAD just to continue on with my career. Every profession has growing pains. You are starving because you want to, if you didn't want to you would find a different career.

If you are good enough you wouldn't be starving.
I've resorted to cannibalism. Bit tricky being pescatarian
 
I am so sick of the "Starving Artist" BS. If you can't make a living as an artist find something that you can make a living at. And no I am not just talking since the AI craze, this BS has been going of for a very long time.

In my first career I was a manual Architectural Draftsman, Drafting is an art form, "So support me financially because I don't want to move with the times". BS all of it. I had to learn AutoCAD just to continue on with my career. Every profession has growing pains. You are starving because you want to, if you didn't want to you would find a different career.

If you are good enough you wouldn't be starving.
You do realize that you just refuted your previous argument concerning your lack of skills, and putting stuff out, right?
 
The part that I am objecting to is that it is being implied that since I cannot finish the last 25% of the race, I never ran the race, and shouldn't be recognized as a participant in the race.
I haven't seen anybody suggesting or implying that in this thread.

If you can't finish the "last 25%" then just run a shorter race.

Nothing is stopping anybody from publishing without art.

For that matter, nothing is stopping anybody from publishing without fleshed out writing. Technically, if all you have is a great idea you can put out a one-sheet of bullet points for the idea itself.

Regardless of if anybody would buy that, you did it.

Everybody is free to choose the length of the race in accordance with their abilities. While a 5k is inargubly less impressive than a marathon, you still get to say you ran it.
 
I haven't seen anybody suggesting or implying that in this thread.

If you can't finish the "last 25%" then just run a shorter race.

Nothing is stopping anybody from publishing without art.

For that matter, nothing is stopping anybody from publishing without fleshed out writing. Technically, if all you have is a great idea you can put out a one-sheet of bullet points for the idea itself.

Regardless of if anybody would buy that, you did it.

Everybody is free to choose the length of the race in accordance with their abilities. While a 5k is inargubly less impressive than a marathon, you still get to say you ran it.
100% this!

CT was published without art after all
 
You do realize that you just refuted your previous argument concerning your lack of skills, and putting stuff out, right?
No I didn't. I was being facetious about knowing art. In my mind Architectural Drafting is not classical artistry. A draftsman takes someone else's vision, the Architects, and draws it either with a drafting table and all the tools or with a computer. I didn't create that the Architect did.

An classic artist takes pencil to paper and has the skill to transfer his vision to that paper, modern uses computers but they still draw the lines. An artist is not someone that takes Arm "A" and attaches it to Body "B"
 
The main problem with using AI to write or produce art is that the product tend to range from very bad to bad to mediocre. Of course, you can edit it to be better - but if you have the skills for that, you're better off just writing it in the first place.

If you don't have the skills for that, I don't want to read your product. Even if it were free.

I've got probably 1000 pages of professionally produced Mongoose stuff on my computer which I paid for and is still waiting to be read (next to the thousands of pages I already read), and I will get to it if I need it for a game. I'm willing to pay for product from a real person who knows how to write - the problem is finding time to read it.

If someone dumps AI schlock on me, even if it is free, it is wasting my time. I don't want it. Maybe I can get an AI to read it for me, so I don't have to?

This situation may change as the technology develops. But at the moment, only people who don't know how to write believe that AI writing is acceptable. Could be, we are just defending a hard-won skill. Could be that it really is garbage.
 
No I didn't. I was being facetious about knowing art. In my mind Architectural Drafting is not classical artistry. A draftsman takes someone else's vision, the Architects, and draws it either with a drafting table and all the tools or with a computer. I didn't create that the Architect did.

An classic artist takes pencil to paper and has the skill to transfer his vision to that paper, modern uses computers but they still draw the lines. An artist is not someone that takes Arm "A" and attaches it to Body "B"
I dont think you're giving yourself enough credit. Its is a skill.. an art... to be able to take somebody else's vision and put it on "paper". Youre no different than the commissioned artist. Running a middle section in the "relay race of creation".

Pardon me if I'm not understanding the Arm A and body B metaphor. Do Architects draw each room separately and then you just drag and drop them around the screen, unchanged, until all the doors and walls line up the way the architect instructed?
 
Back
Top