The UFC has been catching flak from fighters and fans alike for their use of generative AI in some of their recent promotional material in hype packages and a Rizin debutant who emphasizes the A in MMA voiced her thoughts on this topic. Katie Perez is the combatant in question and Perez takes on Kate Lotus in the former’s Rizin Fighting Federation debut at Rizin 53 on May 10th.
Katie Perez leaves it all on the canvas in rings and cages but also in a different way. Her Instagram page features examples of her artwork which features detailed renderings of former UFC champions like Jiri Prochazka as well as Merab Dvalishvili.
When discussing how some have impassioned thoughts on the UFC using generative AI to promote some of their cards in the promo packages and general hype material recently, Perez said [via Bowks Talking Bouts],
“I do. They’re a little bit complicated. I think everyone’s got some some kind of tangled up feelings about AI. I think AI, like everything else related to technological advancement, is a tool. Just like a graphing calculator is a tool, a cell phone is a tool, Google is a tool.”
“We have these tools available to us and we can use them to kind of take out the busy work aspect of things. Which I guess could arguably increase some productivity. I think when it’s used in an artistic context, it tends to be a form of laziness. What’s the word I’m looking for?”
Further expounding on the several tendrils that emanate from the nucleus of the UFC using generative AI for promotional efforts, Perez continued [via Bowks Talking Bouts],
“It’s like an efficiency of I don’t want to learn how to do X, so I’ll use this tool to do it for me. Which I think if AI is used, it has to be disclosed. We’re at a stage right now where you can tell 90-99% of the time like, oh, that’s just AI. But as it progresses, and it’s been exponential how much it’s improved. So, I think for moral reasons, it should be disclosed. It should be like a stamp right on there. No matter what it is, AI videos are weird.”
“Like AI videos creep me out. But yeah, AI in the art space is a little frustrating cuz it’s like there is the theft component. Like what was this model trained on? Did all of those artists give their consent for their work to be read and digested by a computer and then kind of repackaged and spat back out? So that part is a little icky to me. I think if you are doing it for commercial reasons, you should hire a real artist. I think that’s just what should be done. I think that’s more ethical.”
“I think that’s more interesting. I think the creativity that comes from people, from their minds, is beautiful and has yet to be able to be replicated. I’m not going to pretend that AI doesn’t have its uses and that there’s not a convenience factor. Have I used it to clean up photos? Yeah, I’m like, “Hey, can you make this a higher resolution for me?” Maybe I didn’t type it into a language model, but if you’ve gone to one of these sites like a Canva or; they’re escaping my mind right now that I’m trying to think of them.”
“But like if you type in ‘increase photo resolution’ and you put it in there and you’re like, “Oh, I just applied to filters.” Like no, you used AI. You just didn’t really think of it that way. We’ve been using it for a long time and from like doing it for fun, doing it for your personal reference, for your personal whatever is fine.”
“I do think it should have to be disclosed, regardless. I think from a commercial standpoint and just again from an artistic standpoint, like I want to see those posters that have been hand designed by an artist, the composition, the style, the flare.”
“I think it’s awesome. I think we lose something. I think it’s not that it can’t be done with computers necessarily. Not to the same degree, but I think we as a race will lose something. Something of value if we commit to that. So, it’s like a really roundabout way of saying no. But kind of, but no [laughs].”