CivitAI Clubs make Community RAGE
TLDRCivitAI's introduction of 'Clubs', a platform similar to Patreon, has sparked controversy within the community. Critics argue that the system is confusing, requiring users to purchase a virtual currency (BUSD) to support creators, which they believe should be done directly with real money. The concept of clubs, such as the 'Real Cartoon Fan Club' and 'Comedy Club', is also questioned, with users paying for access to content that isn't clearly defined. The video suggests that clubs should be reworked to better support creators, possibly through direct monetary support akin to Patreon. It also emphasizes the importance of compensating creators for their time and resources, contrasting the open-source community's generosity with the expectation of free labor. The speaker advocates for a fair system where creators can receive donations for their contributions to AI image generation.
Takeaways
- 🤔 CivitAI has introduced a 'Clubs' feature similar to Patreon, allowing users to support creators financially, but it has faced criticism due to its implementation.
- 💡 The term 'Clubs' is seen as confusing and not clearly defined, leading to mixed reactions from the community.
- 💰 Users must purchase a virtual currency (BUS) to support creators, which is then paid to the creators, raising concerns about the direct flow of funds.
- 📉 There is skepticism over whether the BUS currency can be exchanged back to real money and the transparency of the process.
- 🤨 The setup of the clubs appears to be more about generating revenue for CivitAI rather than directly supporting creators.
- 🎭 Some clubs, like the 'Comedy Club', seem to offer content that might not justify a financial contribution, such as a space for comedians to post their work.
- 💌 Participation in generation contests and sponsorship of these contests are seen as more reasonable uses of the club system.
- 📈 There is a call for more detailed information on club pages, including videos explaining the concept and what users can expect.
- 🚀 Timed exclusive access and enhanced resources are suggested as good practices, similar to early access for YouTubers on Patreon.
- 📚 Additional resources such as training data, model insights, and advanced descriptions could provide value to power users who wish to support creators.
- 💼 There is a suggestion that CivitAI could offer an ad-free version of their platform, although the effectiveness of this is questioned due to ad blockers.
- 🌐 The open-source community has been a significant driver of innovation in AI image generation, and many creators have chosen to offer their work for free.
Q & A
What is the main issue with CivitAI's introduction of 'Clubs'?
-The main issue is the confusion surrounding the concept of 'Clubs', which is likened to Patreon but requires users to buy a virtual currency (bus) to support creators. This indirect method of support is seen as unnecessary and potentially reduces the amount that reaches the creators.
Why is the use of a virtual currency (bus) in CivitAI's Clubs considered a strange decision?
-The use of a virtual currency adds an extra step to the process of supporting creators. It is implied that the money first goes to CivitAI and then may be distributed to the creators, which is not as direct or transparent as supporting them with real money.
What are the concerns regarding the structure of the Clubs on CivitAI?
-The structure is confusing, with some clubs seemingly being just social groups rather than platforms for financial support. There is also a lack of content and information on the club pages, which does not give potential supporters a clear idea of what they are paying for.
What is suggested as a better practice for timed exclusive access in CivitAI Clubs?
-Timed exclusive access should be similar to Patreon, where creators offer early access to their content for supporters before it becomes available to the public.
How does the concept of 'enhanced resources' in CivitAI Clubs differ from 'additional resources'?
-Enhanced resources suggest a tiered system where a basic version of a model is free and a premium version is paid, whereas additional resources would provide extra content such as training data or advanced descriptions, which enrich the user's experience with the original model.
What is the feedback regarding the idea of a paid commercial license for models?
-The idea is considered interesting but raises questions about the control and rights over the images used for training models. There are doubts about whether community models are based on licensable content.
Why is open source considered a driving force in AI image generation?
-Open source has been crucial because it allows the community to invest time and resources into training models and creating resources, which has led to significant innovations in AI image generation.
What is the speaker's view on people expecting others to work for free?
-The speaker believes that it is not fair for people to expect others to work for free. They emphasize the value of the creators' time, knowledge, and investment and argue that creators deserve some form of compensation for their work.
Why might a donation-based model be considered fair for supporting creators?
-A donation-based model is fair because it allows supporters to contribute voluntarily, and creators can still share their work with those who choose not to donate, albeit with a delay.
What is the speaker's opinion on companies like Mid Journey or Runway that charge for their services?
-The speaker finds it interesting that there is no backlash against companies like Mid Journey or Runway, which charge for their services from the start and do not release their resources into the open-source community.
What is the speaker's suggestion for the future of CivitAI Clubs?
-The speaker suggests that CivitAI Clubs should be reworked to be more in line with the community's needs, with a system that allows direct support of creators with real money, similar to Patreon.
Why is it important to consider the creators' need for financial support?
-As AI becomes more advanced, creators who work full-time on developing resources such as models may rely on this as their main job and passion. It is important to compensate them for their work, especially when their resources are used extensively by others.
Outlines
🤔 Controversy Over Civi's Club Feature
The first paragraph discusses the backlash Civi is facing due to their introduction of 'Clubs,' a feature similar to Patreon, which allows users to financially support creators. The speaker finds the term 'Clubs' confusing and criticizes the use of a virtual currency (bus) instead of direct monetary support. They also question the setup of the clubs, suggesting that the concept is not well-explained and lacks content, which could have been better managed with a preview of what users are paying for. The speaker recommends a more transparent system, like Patreon, and suggests that the clubs should offer clear value, such as exclusive access or additional resources, to justify the cost.
💭 Rethinking the Purpose of Clubs and Creator Support
The second paragraph delves into the broader implications of the Civi Club controversy. It acknowledges that while the concept of clubs is not inherently bad, it needs reworking to align with the community's expectations and to provide real monetary support to creators. The speaker also brings up the idea of a paid commercial license for models, which could be interesting but raises questions about licensing and the origin of the training data. They emphasize the importance of recognizing the effort and resources creators invest in their work and advocate for a system where creators can be compensated, such as through donations. The paragraph also touches on the open-source community's significant contributions to AI image generation and the need for a fair system that respects the creators' efforts and the community's support.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡CivitAI Clubs
💡Virtual Currency (bus)
💡Community Backlash
💡Content Creators
💡Open Source
💡AI Image Generation
💡Patreon
💡Commercial License
💡Enhanced Resources
💡Exclusive Access
💡Community Investment
Highlights
CivitAI introduces 'Clubs', a platform similar to Patreon for supporting creators financially.
The term 'Clubs' is considered confusing and not directly indicative of its purpose.
Currently, users must purchase virtual currency (Bus) to support creators, which is seen as an unnecessary step.
Concerns raised about whether creators can convert Bus back to real money, and if CivitAI retains a portion of the funds.
The structure of Clubs is questioned, with some seeming more like social groups rather than platforms for financial support.
Suggestion that Clubs should provide more value, such as exclusive access to content or resources.
Proposed that Clubs offer a premium version of models for additional support.
Recommendation for Clubs to include metadata insights and exclusive videos for better use of the models.
The idea of providing additional resources like training data or model merges is suggested to enhance the user experience.
Feedback suggests different versions of Clubs, such as ad-supported versions with a paid option for ad-free access.
Discussion on the importance of open-source contributions to AI image generation and the community's significant role.
Criticism towards those who expect creators to work for free without compensation or recognition.
Argument that as AI becomes more advanced, creators should be fairly compensated for their work, especially if it's their main occupation.
Comparison to companies like Mid Journey or Runway, which charge for services and do not release their resources for free use.
The need for a more community-aligned approach to the implementation of Clubs is emphasized.
Creators of valuable resources should be recognized and supported through donations for their contributions to the community.
A call for community feedback on the concept of Clubs and how they can better serve creators and supporters.