You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
24 points

It’s arguably not good that we’re normalizing people being able to use this while its training relied on other creators who were not compensated.

permalink
report
parent
reply
50 points

My programming training relied on other creators who were not compensated.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Were they in public forums and sites like stack overflow and GitHub where they wanted people to use and share their code?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Stable Diffusion uses a dataset from Common Crawl, which pulled art from public websites that allowed them to do so. DeviantArt and ArtStation allowed this, without exception, until recently.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Where did the AI companies get their code from? Is scraped from the likes of stack overflow and GitHub.

They don’t have the proprietary code that is used to run companies because it’s proprietary and it’s never been on a public forum available for download.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I imagine creators who… released their work for free, and/or open source?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Humans using past work to improve, iterate, and further contribute themselves is not the same as a program throwing any and all art into the machine learning blender to regurgitate “art” whenever its button is pushed. Not only does it not add anything to the progress of art, it erases the identity of the past it consumed, all for the blind pursuit of profit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Oh yeah tell me who invented the word ‘regurgitate’ without googling it. Cause the its historical identity is important right?

Or how bout who first created the internet?

Its ok if you dont know, this is how humans work, on the backs of giants

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

Devil’s advocate. It means that only large companies will have AI, as they would be the only ones capable of paying such a large number of people. AI is going to come anyway except now the playing field is even more unfair since you’ve removed the ability for an individual to use the technology.

Instituting these laws would just be the equivalent of companies pulling the ladder up behind them after taking the average artist’s work to use as training data.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

How would you even go about determining what percentage belongs to the AI vs the training data? You could argue all of the royalties should go to the creators of the training data, meaning no one could afford to do it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

How would you identify text or images generated by AI after they have been edited by a human? Even after that, how would you know what was used as the source for training data? People would simply avoid revealing any information and even if you did pass a law and solved all of those issues, it would still only affect the country in question.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

Then we shouldn’t have artists because they looked at other art without paying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Oonga boonga wants his royalty checks for having first drawn a circle 25,000 years ago.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

As distinct from human artists who pay dividends for every image they’ve seen, every idea they’ve heard, and every trend they’ve followed.

The more this technology shovels into the big fat network of What Is Art, the less any single influence will show through.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Literally the definition of greed. They dont deserve royalties for being an inspiration and moving a weight a fraction of a percentage in one direction…

permalink
report
parent
reply

Games

!games@sh.itjust.works

Create post

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc…
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

Community stats

  • 6.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 80K

    Comments

Community moderators