36 points

A small team of 7 was able to create something of this magnitude , all thanks to the various tools of today like Generative AI.

We talk about the bad stuff of AI. But here’s the good… small mom and pop shops being able to release top tier products like the big companies.

permalink
report
reply
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

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

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
-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
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
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
-5 points

AI = stolen data

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

If AI art is stolen data, then every artists on earth are thieves too.

Do you think artists just spontaneously conjure up art? No. Through their entire life of looking at other people’s works, they learned how to do stuff, they emulate and they improve. That’s how human artists come to be. Do you think artists go around asking permission from millions of past artists if they can learn from their art? Do artists track down whoever made the fediverse logo if I want to make a similar shaped art with it? Hell no. Consent in general is impossible too because whole lot of them are likely too dead to give consent be honest. Its the exact same way AI is made.

Your argument holds no consistent logic.

Furthermore, you likely have a misunderstanding of how AI is trained and works. AI models do not store nor copy art that it’s trained on. It studies shapes, concepts, styles, etc. It puts these concepts into matrix of vectors. Billions of images and words are turned into mere 2 gigabytes in something like SD fp16. 2GB is virtually nothing. There’s no compression capable of anywhere near that. So unless you actually took very few images and made a 2GB model, it has no capability to store or copy another person’s art. It has no knowledge of any existing copyrighted work anymore. It only knows the concepts and these concepts like a circle, square, etc. are not copyrightable.

If you think I’m just being pro-AI for the sake of it. Well, it doesn’t matter. Because copyright offices all over the world have started releasing their views on AI art. And it’s unanimously in agreement that it’s not stolen. Furthermore, resulting AI artworks can be copyrighted (lot more complexity there, but that’s for another day).

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

L take, AI is not a person and doesn’t have the right to learn like a person. It is a tool and it can be used to replicate others art.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

permalink
report
reply
19 points

Good interview. They didn’t let them off the hook, but weren’t pushing an agenda either.

This is going to be a moving target that someone is going to pay big bucks to figure out in court. International laws are not up to speed on what is or isn’t ok here, and the ethical discussion is interesting to watch unfold.

permalink
report
reply
13 points

I didn’t see the sub at first and thought it was a kickstarter for a real-life mars terraformation project

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Awesome, I didn’t know they had a kickstarter going. No such thing as bad press I guess.

permalink
report
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

  • 6.7K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 74K

    Comments

Community moderators