Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

OldWorldRevival OP t1_j0mculy wrote

Reply to comment by Wassux in Why are people so opposed to caution and ethics when it comes to AI? by OldWorldRevival

This is really an ignorant take.

I find that people who take this perspective really don't understand how derivative the works are, or understand how AI webcrawling basically destroys people's ability to develop an artistic style and get credit for it because the AI will gobble up and spit their style out with lightning speed without crediting them at all.

To say that this is exactly how humans do it too is absolutely insane. We have so many different types of much more complex, highly developed mental functions and a conscious experience.

You just want to play with this tool because you have no impulse control to wait for few months for more ethically developed tools to come around.

Supporting this nonsense is exactly how people will exploit legal loopholes to take advantage of you.

−3

DaggerShowRabs t1_j0mei28 wrote

Maybe it's derivative, but it's derivative of a large, large amount of works and artists.

I would challenge you to post an example from a series of random prompts, and point out which artists the work is "derived" from.

You couldn't point one, or even a handful out, because of the sheer amount of different works and artists fed in. Even if it's "derivative", it's nearly imperceptibly derivative due to the sheer volume of data.

To say it's "copying" another artist is just completely, utterly incorrect.

4

OldWorldRevival OP t1_j0mfjh1 wrote

I think you might not be up to date on the topic.

Corridor crew did an excellent video where they showcased the new tech, and credited the artist whose name the used in the prompt, but it was very very much like that artists images.

I think this may more be an awareness issue.

It is absolutely able to copy styles, and with high accuracy. I think artists on artstation are particularly angry because they're very ip to date on the styles and tends of artists, so many of them can also see whose work is being used.

2

DaggerShowRabs t1_j0mfot7 wrote

>I think you might not be up to date on the topic.

You would be wrong on that. I'm talking about a series of random prompts, not prompts designed specifically to invoke a specific artist or style.

3

AndromedaAnimated t1_j0mrsup wrote

So it’s basically a tool that can be misused. Previously, humans have been this tool.

Have you never seen artworks being copied and sold illegally? Every dollar store and flea market has „stolen art“, and you used to be able to even order large physical copies of artwork through the internet (a friend of mine did, that’s how I know, and no, I wouldn’t do that - I am a pretty skilled hobby artist, I‘d copy my Van Gogh myself).

Maybe the problem here is the prompts being used? If a human orders an AI to draw „trending on ArtStation“, it’s the human stealing, not the AI. So it would be very easy to prove you are not guilty, eh?

And it’s even possible to use your own pictures…

Is it the knife that’s evil, or the hand that stabs?

1

OldWorldRevival OP t1_j0msidz wrote

AI art is not evil, innately.

The scraping of people's copyrighted, supposedly protected works and then using that work as tooling for your engineered system? That is evil, and it is a human decision that is the evil.

0

AndromedaAnimated t1_j0mv7h3 wrote

Sorry cannot answer more. Your comment about dogs and calculus shows me that you are not safe for discussion 🤪

0

WarImportant9685 t1_j0mfkj0 wrote

no I have tried stable diffusion, and you can enter prompt with blablabla + name of artist style. It does create the artist style. And sometimes there are even the artist handsign!

−1