Post #2160516
2022-12-12 19:03 UTC
Replies (17)
-
@GraysonBell@writing.exchange 2022-12-12 19:07
@Manigarm@mastodon.social All this controversy has had me wonder: why not train the AIs with only art in the public domain? That, at least, would be less problematic, wouldn't it? Also, they should be made to list and credit their sources, regardless.
-
@lochlomondwhiskey@kolektiva.social 2022-12-12 19:46
@Manigarm@mastodon.social I'm increasingly reading "AI" as artificial innocence. Much accurate description of what it actually is + who's responsible for its endless misgivings
-
@redgypsee@canada.masto.host 2022-12-12 19:49
@Manigarm@mastodon.social Love this, I am not an AI and I may have to steal "AIs aren't sentient. They can't steal." Big conversation this week. Lol.
-
@erica_sea55@mastodon.au 2022-12-12 20:24
@Manigarm@mastodon.social there are some incredible artists using ai, who are producing really creative stuff. They’re no more plagiarists than a writer who reads other literature or a photographer who uses Photoshop or a visual artist who gets inspiration from other artists. I’m not an artist, just do it for fun and a creative outlet, and for academic research, and use the various apps as a creative generator. I frequently don’t use any artists at all, just style modifiers, or try just using the names of long dead ones, and I do heaps of extra work/mashups in Photoshop. There’s a big difference between some of the more complicated ai art apps such as Disco Diffusion and local installs/Colabs of Stable Diffusion (outputs can be really random) and say, some Midjourney outputs.
-
@JDWr1ghtBra1n@mstdn.party 2022-12-12 20:28
@Manigarm@mastodon.social Then explain this prompt I made of "Groucho Marx dressed as Batman". The image is terrible, BUT you can clearly see the Getty Images watermark.
-
@cswalker21@mastodon.online 2022-12-12 20:37
@Manigarm@mastodon.social It’s like saying that crowbars are breaking into houses.
-
@sstrader@masto.ai 2022-12-12 21:12
@Manigarm@mastodon.social Similarly, algorithms aren't flawed because they are gender or racially biased, only the unexamined assumptions of programmers can cause that.
-
@PaulInRainCity@heads.social 2022-12-12 21:34
@Manigarm@mastodon.social Okay, but these people and institutions are still doing a shitty thing when they use the products of working artists without consent, credit or compensation to build a for-profit venture.
-
@floede@genart.social 2022-12-12 22:15
@Manigarm@mastodon.social I find it hard to really see how AI software should credit the original artist. As long as 1) They software company don't try to capitalize of those names, like "in the style of X". Or 2) Actually re-create existing work. If the AI creates truly new and unique work, how is that any different than us humans getting inspired by existing art. I don't have to credit Hirst no matter how much I try to copy him. It might not be considered art, but I'm perfectly free to do that.
-
@yomismo@ioc.exchange 2022-12-12 22:37
@Manigarm@mastodon.social don't artists steal from artists? Don't artists steal daily stuff or situations and call it art? Copy from one resource and it will be called plagiarism, copy from many and it will be called a research. According to that, AI is doing its research and with pretty good results.
-
@aral@mastodon.ar.al 2022-12-12 22:39
@Manigarm@mastodon.social So much this.
-
@ablackcatstail@goblackcat.net 2022-12-12 22:48
@Manigarm@mastodon.social It's humans programming them to steal.
-
@SethPFR@fashionsocial.host 2022-12-12 22:50
@Manigarm@mastodon.social an outstanding point and a linguistic clue to attitudes and often intent.
-
@rrb@qoto.org 2022-12-12 22:53
@Manigarm@mastodon.social I keep thinking of Sturgeon's law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_Law Which means we are producing automated BS artists. While it is true that this demonstrates human level intelligence, neither do I think that is worth any effort. Unless you want to spend eternity reading Finnegan's Wake over and over agian.
-
@grumpasaurus@fosstodon.org 2022-12-12 22:54
@Manigarm@mastodon.social you'd be surprised at how many people feel they can't be doing something wrong if they don't understand why.
-
@mark_mcguire@mastodon.nz 2022-12-12 22:58
@Manigarm@mastodon.social My dog ate my essay but an AI managed to borrow one from the internet for me. I plan to return it after it’s marked.
-
@mattblaze@federate.social 2022-12-12 23:03
@Manigarm@mastodon.social This is an interesting point, and certainly correct. It's also exactly how humans learn to become artists and writers - by studying, mimicking, and eventually adding to the existing body of work. We don't generally consider that theft, unless the copying is exact or deceptive. Yet AI feels somehow different, much more like plagiarism. Perhaps it's that the ONLY input an ML system has is others' art, with no real-world human experience of its own to contribute.