• lauha@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Remember, AI cannot hold a copyright. That AI art you created? No you didn’t, AI did and it’s basically public domain.

    • neidu4@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      3 days ago

      Well, its “skill” was built on public domain or via piracy, so its result should be public domain too.

      Hell, my interpretation of the “derivative works” clause of GPL stipulates that all llm and genai products should also be gpl.

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Hell, my interpretation of the “derivative works” clause of GPL stipulates that all llm and genai products should also be gpl.

        …an interpretation broad enough to cover that would also mean that anyone who has ever seen GPL code before would only ever be able to write GPL code ever again. The idea of which I imagine would give Richard Stallman an erection you could see from space,

        • sem@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s different when a human does it accident than when companies build a licence laundering machine

        • arudesalad@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          That’s close to the actual intention. Most MIT rewrites of GPL projects don’t accept contributions from people familiar with the original codebase.

    • Funwayguy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’m still convinced that being unable to copyright its output was always part of idea of laundering the stolen data fed in. This way it effectively self sabotages the copyrights of every company and individual using it.

    • scops@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      So if I could convince a model to do a frame-by-frame recreation of a specific movie, maybe change a detail here or there, then I could distribute that movie without violating copyright?

      • purplemonkeymad@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        I would suspect it would end in a similar manner to reverse engineering code, if you get a description of the whole film without specific products or actors, then recreate from that, then yes. But if you directly compare the scenes and make corrections to the output to make them closer, then no.

        But you’ll have to do it and get sued anyway so the courts can rule on it.

  • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    3 days ago

    One of my core memories is the shy girl in my photography class at community college complementing the pictures I took of my cat.

  • HerbGrower@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 days ago

    AI can make a picture, it can’t make value. I have seen some decent looking AI generated images, but there is absolutely no value to them.

    Like copying a jpg and calling yourself an artist.

  • iceonfire1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    3 days ago

    The standard to qualify as art is very low. The standard to qualify as worth looking at is much higher.

  • Ech@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 days ago

    …need to impress the shy girl…

    For some, sure. Creating art means many different things to many different people, but it always means something. Generated content has no meaning. It’s just output.

  • radix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    Art is about creating emotion. AI art does create emotions/feelings (hate, anger, nausea, etc).

  • Talcosis@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    No, no, you see AI artists do have intent to impress.

    It’s just that instead of impressing the girl in art class and maybe bumping genitals, they want to impress the 4chan mob and maybe get up votes.

    • Aeder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Considering how 4chan is, a more likely outcome is that you’re getting called at least 3 different slurs because someone will either hate the slop, or perceive your insecurity about being unable to do art and decide to attack you.

  • churrodestroyer@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    If they don’t respect the art enough to properly create it, then I’m not going to respect it either.

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 days ago

    As we all know, nobody finds any value in things made by robots.

    Now excuse me while I go drive my human manufactured car on the hand-paved streets into fantasyland.

  • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    3 days ago

    Prose: Art
    Prose ran through a machine : NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO THAT’S NOT HECKING ART!

    Fuck the AI companies but come on man.

    • PoastRotato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      That’s not the same thing at all though? When you provide a prompt to an AI, you’re basically just feeding it instructions on what to make. I don’t think anyone would ever refer to an instruction manual as art.

      • supernight52@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        AI doesn’t “make” anything. It steals. All you get when you prompt an AI, is a poor copy of an original piece that it was trained on. Otherwise, you’re completely correct.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          This represents such an entirely wrong idea of what’s going on that it’s almost hilarious. The model doesn’t just have an internal database of all the training data that it, like, collages together. Holy fuck, if a model internally contained all of the training data in a form it could simply be retrieved from it would be far more valuable as data compression than anything else it might be or do.

          What’s much closer is that an image generation model has seen millions of pictures, each labeled with metadata about what it is a picture of, each of which causes tiny adjustments to the neural networks weights, because the model is being trained to be able to look at a novel picture and recognize “this picture is of a dog pissing on an apple tree”. Any model that can do that can also be run in reverse - essentially “here is a block of white noise I am saying is supposed to be a really noisy picture of a dog pissing on an apple tree, try to clean up the noise and show me how it looks like a dog pissing on an apple tree”, then run that in a loop until the picture doesn’t change much between iterations. It doesn’t need to have seen something precisely identical to what it’s generating - with enough training data it has an internal model for things like dogs, clowns or what makes something look like anime and the generation just tickles the bits until the picture rates as probably being what’s being asked for.

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        I don’t think anyone would ever refer to an instruction manual as art.

        Grandma’s cookbook?

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        That’s right, I’m Mr OpenAI and I’m here to say, having your privacy violated through backdoors is A-OK!