That doesn’t sound like a kind of “AI” usage I’m particularly concerned about, but would be willing to listen to reasons of why it is or isn’t a problem
I just genuinely don’t like the look of most AI generated imagery, also there’s the ever prevalent conundrum that is the lack of supporting actual human artists.
Out of curiosity, did you not like the images before you read that they used AI? Its pretty obvious that it was used as a tool by human artists from the write-up, in the same way that a human artist would use Photoshop.
I’ve never understood this argument in a vacuum. Fair use includes education. And people have been getting inspired by art they don’t own a copyright to for ever.
There are lots of other critiques of ai that I do agree with.
Yeah, everything is a remix. I think it all boils down to preferences on copyright and corpos as entities.
It’s easier for me to accept that an inventor gets a 30+ year copyright (or lifelong for that matter) in our current societal setup. I even understand how most things today are a collaboration, so we need bigger entities to hold such copyrights. And this is the point where I personally start seeing the problems.
I feel if we keep this up, art will move towards a l’art pour l’art phase. Mass media will turn into something personally tuned and we’ll be charged a premium for something that was touched by human inspiration. Don’t know if I helped or digressed too much, but these are my worries in the vacuum.
That doesn’t sound like a kind of “AI” usage I’m particularly concerned about, but would be willing to listen to reasons of why it is or isn’t a problem
I just genuinely don’t like the look of most AI generated imagery, also there’s the ever prevalent conundrum that is the lack of supporting actual human artists.
Out of curiosity, did you not like the images before you read that they used AI? Its pretty obvious that it was used as a tool by human artists from the write-up, in the same way that a human artist would use Photoshop.
Yes, I actually sought out the AI disclaimer to confirm my suspicions since they had that uncanny valley feel to them.
A human artist using Photoshop would generally know how to fix that.
The AI used was likely trained on sets of data without the consent nor compensation of the people whose works were used.
They devs literally addressed that in the comment above
I didn’t take it to mean that the AI was exclusively trained on their own images, but good on them if they are.
I’ve never understood this argument in a vacuum. Fair use includes education. And people have been getting inspired by art they don’t own a copyright to for ever.
There are lots of other critiques of ai that I do agree with.
Yeah, everything is a remix. I think it all boils down to preferences on copyright and corpos as entities.
It’s easier for me to accept that an inventor gets a 30+ year copyright (or lifelong for that matter) in our current societal setup. I even understand how most things today are a collaboration, so we need bigger entities to hold such copyrights. And this is the point where I personally start seeing the problems.
I feel if we keep this up, art will move towards a l’art pour l’art phase. Mass media will turn into something personally tuned and we’ll be charged a premium for something that was touched by human inspiration. Don’t know if I helped or digressed too much, but these are my worries in the vacuum.