Personalized Site Feed

I agree the ethical aspects of genAI (specifically what they are trained on), is – at best – extremely questionable. Wether or not the use of genAI is creative; if it will go away or not / if genAI is just a trend, all seem to be personal questions --> so for the sake of this conversation, Imma stick to the subject of Cara :)

Read through David Revoy's critique; what specific points you agree on, I don't know, but thanks for linking the critique, as it does present a lot of interesting points; and you have a valid point, that Cara's genAI detector being Hive AI, does seem a little weird, and wasn't an aspect of the platform I was aware of before. So thanks for pointing that out :)

My only concern is that Revoy's critiques mainly build on assuming bad faith on the part of Cara and the digital art community. Specifically the point "They (Cara) can sell it (your data) to a third party at any time", and "You are a prisoner of the Cara ecosystem". It does seem to come from a place of valid concern since Revoy suggests the solution to both, being to make Cara opensource. It does seem that most articles and talk of Cara is all from 2024 (including Revoy's critique), and that it may be easier to figure out their current stance on Revoy's critiques, by simply asking Zhang herself. Also, Revoy's jab at the digital art community seems like an unecessary insult: "It sounds to me like the collective intelligence of the digital art community still hasn't learned the lesson of "no proprietary, closed and centralized"." --> In many ways, it seems most of Revoy's critiques sow mistrust, without adressing concrete issues outside of the lacking opensource (transparency) of Cara.

I was unable to find Zhang or the Cara team responding to the opensource thing, but I did find this response from the official Cara account in regards to rumors from 2024 ( https://cara.app/post/a11308b5-c435-4c47-9aab-ecf067fc527e ). Revoy did however respond to this ( https://framapiaf.org/@Deus@charcha.cc/112580012301285068 ) stating: "I would prefer to get these claims baked by evidences and transparency rather than just believe what their PR service reply" --> which I agree, Cara has not (to my knowledge), been particularly transparent about this aspect, beyond what is stated in the linked post.

The only thing I strongly disagree with from Revoy's critique (beyond the use of unecessary insults), is that Cara is "A closed social media where artists post for... other artists" --> Wether or not this critique was true in 2024, I can't know, but in the same way that PMC isn't a closed social media where Minecrafters post for other Minecrafters, Cara isn't a closed social media either; a site having a specific theme, does not make it a closed social media. It caters to a specific community, but calling it closed is false.

To wrap up; firstly, thanks for your thought-out response :) To trust, or not to trust Cara, I think is best determined by looking for, wether they act in accordance with their stated goal of protecting artists, and not selling their users data to Hive AI, or any other third party. So far – from what I can find – Zhang is bogged down with lawsuits, fighting for artists rights and heavier genAI regulations; while the Cara dev-team (like with the PMC dev-team), implement user suggestions and don't shy away from answering concerns about data usage on their website (through their Discord); all of which align with their stated goals. Revoy's critique sadly reads more like a prediction that ignores these efforts on the part of Cara, in favor of presenting a hypothetical future where Cara is just another Instagram-clone stealing from artists by design --> which seems to bury both Cara's reputation, and the valid concerns Revoy has about Cara.

I would like to expand on what I said (cuz I forgot and was tired ^^;) because genAI 'art' isn't just unethical but it's just not art in the first place because it's not creative among other reasons and Cara's conditional stance on it is weird and gave me the ick (and still does) when I first found out.
I was more so mainly concerned about how ethical it was and the theft it was doing once before too but when I was confronted with the thoughts of if genAI 'art' was creative or could even be considered art in the first place, my position immediately changed to being against genAI in creative spaces and the creative arts in the first place (including music, videos, etc).
With that being said, it begs the question of why Cara can't just continue keeping the site/app genAI free since it seems (hopefully?) to be doing such a good job anyways. It's just kinda weird to think about because they definitely can keep genAI out of creative spaces.
Also, my thoughts on if genAI is going or staying is that I do think the genAI bubble will pop. Or I think it will go away in creative spaces at least. Eventually. It just seems like one of those trends people have latched on and with every trend, it does die, especially since genAI slop is not very popular in artist communities. I do genuinely hope this trend dies.
I did also find someone before who wrote a critique on Cara and I do agree with most of what he says and points out. -> https://www.davidrevoy.com/article1032/a-critique-of-caraapp-the-no-ai-instagram-and-artstation-copycat-child#3-the-negative-points
One thing I think he missed though was Cara's genAI detector is Hive AI; a site/program that seems to offer both genAI moderation services and genAI models. Which. Isn't great to me. Cara's TOS does say that it does not allow anyone including third parties to train on the data and artwork, but with the conditional stance on allowing genAI on the platform, it does make me feel like there's something going on, whether or not Hive AI is involved. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cara_(app)
I personally don't trust Cara, at least not anymore. I used to have an account but after learning about all this, it didn't leave a good taste in my mouth, and just again, it's really weird and odd.
Anyways, not trying to change your mind, but I thought I'd add on some more to my points and the conversation.

Didn't know that about Cara. Thank you for recommending alternatives to YouTube, I'll see if I can make it work. You have a valid point that genAI in creative spaces isn't ethical; to that I will add, that I don't think genAI is going away either. From Cara's about page, it seems that the goal with temporarily keeping out genAI, is to force regulators to clearly protect artists, and have all genAI content labeled as generated.

Assuming genAI isn't going away, I think clear protection of artists, and having all genAI content clearly labeled is worth supporting with how regulators currently are; that said. I agree with your point, that if Cara one day submits to genAI slop – without clear artist protection, and without clear labels – that is a no-go for me as well. But, for now, I trust Cara and their team :)