Shared in Comic Strips@lemmy.world 16 days ago
0/2000
c
churrodestroyer@lemmy.zip 16 days ago
If they donāt respect the art enough to properly create it, then Iām not going to respect it either.
H
HerbGrower@slrpnk.net 16 days ago
AI can make a picture, it canāt 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.
l
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 16 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.
E
Ech@lemmy.ca 16 days ago
ā¦need to impress the shy girlā¦
For some, sure. Creating art means many different things to many different people, but it always means something. Generated content has no meaning. Itās just output.
F
FauxLiving@lemmy.world 16 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.
l
lauha@lemmy.world 16 days ago
Remember, AI cannot hold a copyright. That AI art you created? No you didnāt, AI did and itās basically public domain.
s
scops@reddthat.com 16 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?
p
purplemonkeymad@programming.dev 16 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 youāll have to do it and get sued anyway so the courts can rule on it.
Funwayguy@lemmy.world 16 days ago
Iām 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.
n
neidu4@piefed.social 16 days ago
Well, its āskillā was built on public domain or by piracy, so its result should be public d9main too.
Hell, my interpretation of the āderivative worksā clause of GPL stipulates that all llm and genai products should also be gpl.
S
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 16 days ago
Hell, my interpretation of the āderivative worksā clause of GPL stipulates that all llm and genai products should also be gpl.
ā¦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,
T
Talcosis@lemmy.zip 16 days ago
No, no, you see AI artists do have intent to impress.
Itās 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.
A
Aeder@lemmy.world 16 days ago
Considering how 4chan is, a more likely outcome is that youāre 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.
radix@lemmy.world 16 days ago
Art is about creating emotion. AI art does create emotions/feelings (hate, anger, nausea, etc).
Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 days ago
So does posting a giant pile of diarrhea.
S
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 16 days ago
Or installing a urinal as an exhibit in an art museum? That one was pretty famous.
E
ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 days ago
There have in fact been very successful art installations involving human waste and feces.
i
iceonfire1@lemmy.world 16 days ago
The standard to qualify as art is very low. The standard to qualify as worth looking at is much higher.