Im so sick and tired of greedy artists trying to halt AI Art

[Millennial_KiwiGamer]

AI Art is the ultimate equalizer in the sense that it allows anyone to put in a description of what they want and then they get that, or something near enough.

It's fantastic for users. It gets rid of needing to commission every little thing saving $$ for the average bob. Not everyone is made of money to be paying artists tons of money for a picture that might take days to make when you can just roll the generator a few times and get something of equal if not better quality than the artist themselves.

The "compromise" argument is also hilarious. Anyone who pays an artist OR uses a generator is compromising because they're relying on a third party to make their vision.

AI Art Good. Greedy Artist bad. :)

[crunchyfrog]

Początkowo opublikowane przez St✩rlight:

Right. If you kept your points short and concise, they would be easier to understand.

Sorry but you are free to ask me to explain things. SOunds like you're makiong excuses now.

So I'll ask again - where did I say both AI was uncopyrightable and not?

[Michanicks]

Początkowo opublikowane przez crunchyfrog:

Początkowo opublikowane przez St✩rlight:

Right. If you kept your points short and concise, they would be easier to understand.

Sorry but you are free to ask me to explain things. SOunds like you're makiong excuses now.

So I'll ask again - where did I say both AI was uncopyrightable and not?

Man, he already got caught lying and now just struggles to accept that he's lost and can't support his point of view.

[Michanicks]

Początkowo opublikowane przez St✩rlight:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Michanicks:

Man, he already got caught lying and now just struggles to accept that he's lost and can't support his point of view.

Stop dog-piling.

Okay, if you ask so.

[Goblin]

we really making robots to do the things that make us human, and not the boring crap that takes away from our life.

[kingjames488]

Początkowo opublikowane przez crunchyfrog:

Początkowo opublikowane przez 🍋 Lemonfed 🍋:

it's a trademark and there are limits on what you can do with it , like you could not start your own restaurant chain and have a logo that look similar to their just because you've downloaded their logo on twitter.

Here's something else people like the OP don't understand too.

Regarding copyright and all that, sure you can always sell game discs, music CDs and so on because you're transferring ownership of that copy. Of course you cannot rebadge everything as your own work and resell it that way, as you rightly point out.

But there's also another big problem for AI, not just the fact that it steals art and so on.

Ever heard of the "monkey selfie"?

Quite a famous test case of a nature photographer who was photographing some monkey somewhere, and they dropped their camera or left it somewhere. A smart monkey found it, started fiddling with it and took it's own picture, playing around. As luck would have it, it's well framed and pretty cool (you can google it).

Now here's the kicker - WHO OWNS THE COPYRIGHT?

Because the guy was delighted once he found the camera again and got the picture out. He did rather well off the story and the photo. Iirc, it was the WWF (World Wildlife Fund) that sued him, arguing that the money was the actual creator of the work and that any such proceeds should at least be offered to helping them and their habitat.

Seems fair right?

Except no. They lost. Because it is written in copyright that ONLY a human can create copyrighted work. There were previous earlier cases where animals had done things like paintings that people had tried to copyright and they failed because of this.

So the monkey selfie remains a piece that NOBODY owns the copyright to.

So, AI art can't be copyrighted, which made me laugh recently when that idiot who won a competition with an AI piece he instructed complained that people were "stealing" his work. Because quite simply it CANNOT be his or anyone's work by law.

This might not seem much of an issue up front, but here's the real point - at the moment AIs are like every other start up. They burn through colossal amounts of money because they are trying desperately to make their companies/product worth value so they can sell it in a few years. It's what most silicon valley startups do.

So Ai wil gladly be free for you right now as you're helping them build it. But it's costing STAGGERING amounts of energy and therefore money. It won't last because once it gets to the point in a few years where they need to either start charging people or sell the company, how are they going to make much revenue when ANYONE can just steal their output because it can't be copyrighted hmm?

it was also an episode of star trek TNG decades ago where they debated if data could actually own himself... let alone anything he(it?) created.

it's funny how these topics have been discussed for decades but somehow some people thinks it's a new idea or discussion.

kinda like the animal rights people as you mentioned... want to give animals human rights... but that will never happen so long as it's legal to own an animal... and if you can't own an animal you can't hold people responsible for their acitons... and people reeeeally like to hold someone else responsible when a miss-managed dog attacks someone.

[crunchyfrog]

Początkowo opublikowane przez kingjames488:

Początkowo opublikowane przez crunchyfrog:

Here's something else people like the OP don't understand too.

Regarding copyright and all that, sure you can always sell game discs, music CDs and so on because you're transferring ownership of that copy. Of course you cannot rebadge everything as your own work and resell it that way, as you rightly point out.

But there's also another big problem for AI, not just the fact that it steals art and so on.

Ever heard of the "monkey selfie"?

Quite a famous test case of a nature photographer who was photographing some monkey somewhere, and they dropped their camera or left it somewhere. A smart monkey found it, started fiddling with it and took it's own picture, playing around. As luck would have it, it's well framed and pretty cool (you can google it).

Now here's the kicker - WHO OWNS THE COPYRIGHT?

Because the guy was delighted once he found the camera again and got the picture out. He did rather well off the story and the photo. Iirc, it was the WWF (World Wildlife Fund) that sued him, arguing that the money was the actual creator of the work and that any such proceeds should at least be offered to helping them and their habitat.

Seems fair right?

Except no. They lost. Because it is written in copyright that ONLY a human can create copyrighted work. There were previous earlier cases where animals had done things like paintings that people had tried to copyright and they failed because of this.

So the monkey selfie remains a piece that NOBODY owns the copyright to.

So, AI art can't be copyrighted, which made me laugh recently when that idiot who won a competition with an AI piece he instructed complained that people were "stealing" his work. Because quite simply it CANNOT be his or anyone's work by law.

This might not seem much of an issue up front, but here's the real point - at the moment AIs are like every other start up. They burn through colossal amounts of money because they are trying desperately to make their companies/product worth value so they can sell it in a few years. It's what most silicon valley startups do.

So Ai wil gladly be free for you right now as you're helping them build it. But it's costing STAGGERING amounts of energy and therefore money. It won't last because once it gets to the point in a few years where they need to either start charging people or sell the company, how are they going to make much revenue when ANYONE can just steal their output because it can't be copyrighted hmm?

it was also an episode of star trek TNG decades ago where they debated if data could actually own himself... let alone anything he(it?) created.

it's funny how these topics have been discussed for decades but somehow some people thinks it's a new idea or discussion.

kinda like the animal rights people as you mentioned... want to give animals human rights... but that will never happen so long as it's legal to own an animal... and if you can't own an animal you can't hold people responsible for their acitons... and people reeeeally like to hold someone else responsible when a miss-managed dog attacks someone.

Bloody excellent point there!

That's exactly it - when you give a cursory thought AROUND the problem you will quickly find it doesn't gel with everything else. As you rightly point out, if we gave animals such rights, then it opens a MASSIVE can of worms. That's also what people dfon't grasp - I always go on about people not thinking through a problem properly. Why? Becuase I do it too. We ALL do.

And you're absolutely right. It annoys me when people bang out these ideas or things as if they're entirely new. VERY little is.

It's why Elon Musk the complete idiot gets laughed at. He often puts out obscenely stupid marketing, sure. But his "ideas" are never new. He just THINKS they are. It's all very Dunning Kreuger.

Like his idiotic Hyperloop. He claimed to have invented it even though it was an idea first promoted seriously about 100 years previously.

[ナルゴ]

Początkowo opublikowane przez crunchyfrog:

It's why Elon Musk the complete idiot gets laughed at. He often puts out obscenely stupid marketing, sure. But his "ideas" are never new. He just THINKS they are. It's all very Dunning Kreuger.

People post stuff like this about him. Meanwhile his networth grew by 23.9 billion just today.
Dunning Kreuger indeed.

[ナルゴ]

Correction. It's apparently 27 billion now
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/10/24/elon-musk-gets-20-billion-richer-as-tesla-stock-rides-earnings-to-17-rally/

[Michanicks]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Nargo:

Początkowo opublikowane przez crunchyfrog:

It's why Elon Musk the complete idiot gets laughed at. He often puts out obscenely stupid marketing, sure. But his "ideas" are never new. He just THINKS they are. It's all very Dunning Kreuger.

People post stuff like this about him. Meanwhile his networth grew by 23.9 billion just today.
Dunning Kreuger indeed.

TIL money and rich parents make right.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Nargo:

Correction. It's apparently 27 billion now :lunar2019crylaughingpig:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/10/24/elon-musk-gets-20-billion-richer-as-tesla-stock-rides-earnings-to-17-rally/

Net worth doesn't mean actual wealth.

[L9 dorothea]

lovely how you can be born into immeasurable wealth, throw it all away on stupid stuff and keep getting immeasurable wealth

[kingjames488]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Nargo:

Początkowo opublikowane przez crunchyfrog:

It's why Elon Musk the complete idiot gets laughed at. He often puts out obscenely stupid marketing, sure. But his "ideas" are never new. He just THINKS they are. It's all very Dunning Kreuger.

People post stuff like this about him. Meanwhile his networth grew by 23.9 billion just today.
Dunning Kreuger indeed.

the man knows how to market a propane torch... among other things.

[crunchyfrog]

Początkowo opublikowane przez kingjames488:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Nargo:

People post stuff like this about him. Meanwhile his networth grew by 23.9 billion just today.
Dunning Kreuger indeed.

the man knows how to market a propane torch... among other things.

That's the thing - he knows how to market or speak ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

As long as there's rubes to believe him, it will continue.

BUt his stock market wealth means almost nothing. He can't immediately draw that money out as it doesn't work like that so this growth is nonsense.

For the alleged richest person in the world very little of his worth is in anything really tangible.

In fact, his worth of something like Tesla is only valuable because they magically got it registered on the stock market as a TECH company and not a CAR company. Otherwise it wouldn't be quite as good.

Plus the only reason he does well is because he LOVES socialism .... for him. ALL his projects get considerable government funding. He loves it.

[crunchyfrog]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Midori's Ghost:

I don't think there are many people who have an issue with AI art as long as you don't claim you "drew" it or God forbid try to sell it

It's a fun little benchmark for AI in my opinion.

Actually yes I do because I've seen a little bit further than that.

The obvious one is as I've said many times already - dilution.

Have you not experienced how much worse Google has got for searches over the last couple of years?

That's down to a similar trick. Google started allowing more payments to do SEO and tesit the results.

AI will dilute. On it's creation any data AI will train off will be 100% human created. From that day onward it will only dilute as it's own creations go back into the pool.

It's just straightforward how that will distort and worsen things. The actual creators of AI have spoken on it, including those two who recently won Nobel Prizes.

[crunchyfrog]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Midori's Ghost:

Początkowo opublikowane przez crunchyfrog:

Actually yes I do because I've seen a little bit further than that.

The obvious one is as I've said many times already - dilution.

Have you not experienced how much worse Google has got for searches over the last couple of years?

That's down to a similar trick. Google started allowing more payments to do SEO and tesit the results.

AI will dilute. On it's creation any data AI will train off will be 100% human created. From that day onward it will only dilute as it's own creations go back into the pool.

It's just straightforward how that will distort and worsen things. The actual creators of AI have spoken on it, including those two who recently won Nobel Prizes.

Good point, dilution and oversaturation really.

I have to add -diffusion -AI to remove those tags from searches from images, otherwise they all look the same and awful.

Yeah sadly this is the age old problem with new tech.

Everyone who gets awed by it are people that haven't the first clue how it works. They just see "wow, magic" and believe everything that's said.

They must have it, but they still don't understand what exactly it is for.

And people try to shoe horn it into everything, again still not understand what it is, let alone the pitfalls.

One only has to look at 3D films, TV and so on. That came about in the 1950s and failed, the 1960s, failed. The 1980s, failed, and more recently with the big old pushes from gaming and film and still failed.

If you look at why it speaks volumes.