stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to Technology@lemmy.world · 10 months agoArtists are making creative companies apologize for using AIwww.theverge.comexternal-linkmessage-square42fedilinkarrow-up1196arrow-down110file-text
arrow-up1186arrow-down1external-linkArtists are making creative companies apologize for using AIwww.theverge.comstopthatgirl7@kbin.social to Technology@lemmy.world · 10 months agomessage-square42fedilinkfile-text
minus-squarebramblepatchmystery@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11arrow-down3·10 months agoIf artists aren’t producing work and just complaining about AI art, who is AI stealing the work of? Your argument literally defeats itself.
minus-squareShurimal@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up7arrow-down13·10 months agoNo-one. Training a neural network, natural or artificial, is not “stealing”. Or no artist would be able to study the works of other artists to become a better artist themself.
minus-squarebramblepatchmystery@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11arrow-down2·10 months agoYour argument seems to be that we should consider the AI to itself be an artist and to grant it the rights of other artists. That’s fair. But other artists aren’t allowed to profit off reproducing other’s works. They also are compensated for their work. Is OpenAI putting money in a trust for when their product gains sentience?
minus-square520@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up8arrow-down1·edit-210 months ago But other artists aren’t allowed to profit off reproducing other’s works. But we do allow them to take inspiration from other artists and emulate their styles. Much of the issue around AI art seems to be more about the prompter (IE: asking explicitly for copyrighted stuff or real people) than the AI itself.
If artists aren’t producing work and just complaining about AI art, who is AI stealing the work of?
Your argument literally defeats itself.
No-one. Training a neural network, natural or artificial, is not “stealing”. Or no artist would be able to study the works of other artists to become a better artist themself.
Your argument seems to be that we should consider the AI to itself be an artist and to grant it the rights of other artists.
That’s fair.
But other artists aren’t allowed to profit off reproducing other’s works.
They also are compensated for their work.
Is OpenAI putting money in a trust for when their product gains sentience?
But we do allow them to take inspiration from other artists and emulate their styles.
Much of the issue around AI art seems to be more about the prompter (IE: asking explicitly for copyrighted stuff or real people) than the AI itself.