4 ms·

Well, digital art already allows you to copy/paste a layer and stuff that traditional art never allowed for. Imagine copy pasting a statue. This is sort of the

Well, digital art already allows you to copy/paste a layer and stuff that traditional art never allowed for. Imagine copy pasting a statue. This is sort of the same thing on steroids. You can copy/remix previous art by feeding them into a ML model in training mode, and it will be massively utilized the same way ctrl-c ctrl-v is used, but it's a part of the toolset of art creation, not replacing it.

numpad0 5y ago
> You can copy/remix previous art by feeding them into a ML model in training mode, and it will be massively utilized the same way ctrl-c ctrl-v is used, Then you need attributions for said previous arts, all of it, at least going by texts of laws.
- Gigachad 5y ago
  No you don’t. Otherwise human artists would have to list out hundreds of attributions for every bit of art they saw that influenced their style.
  - numpad0 5y ago
    Ctrl-C Ctrl-V is a career killer for human artists. Why it's not for ML? e: the argument for human artists is human inspirations are generalized and artists’ own interpretations are always added to it, and for ML it’s that their network weights are highly generalized and likewise not a copy; but IMO a more solid line has to be drawn and distinction has to be made between C-c C-v and generalization at some point forward.
    - nybble41 5y ago
      > Ctrl-C Ctrl-V is a career killer for human artists. Why it's not for ML? Human artists use copy/paste as a tool all the time, and it doesn't kill their careers. The element you're missing here is that jychang wasn't talking about copying pieces verbatim from others' work without permission & attribution, but rather using it as a tool to manipulate your own art ("to copy/paste a layer"). Imagine being able to do the same but with an AI model working behind the scenes to adjust the object to fit the scene it's being pasted into.

numpad0 5y ago

> You can copy/remix previous art by feeding them into a ML model in training mode, and it will be massively utilized the same way ctrl-c ctrl-v is used, Then you need attributions for said previous arts, all of it, at least going by texts of laws.

Gigachad 5y ago
No you don’t. Otherwise human artists would have to list out hundreds of attributions for every bit of art they saw that influenced their style.
- numpad0 5y ago
  Ctrl-C Ctrl-V is a career killer for human artists. Why it's not for ML? e: the argument for human artists is human inspirations are generalized and artists’ own interpretations are always added to it, and for ML it’s that their network weights are highly generalized and likewise not a copy; but IMO a more solid line has to be drawn and distinction has to be made between C-c C-v and generalization at some point forward.
  - nybble41 5y ago
    > Ctrl-C Ctrl-V is a career killer for human artists. Why it's not for ML? Human artists use copy/paste as a tool all the time, and it doesn't kill their careers. The element you're missing here is that jychang wasn't talking about copying pieces verbatim from others' work without permission & attribution, but rather using it as a tool to manipulate your own art ("to copy/paste a layer"). Imagine being able to do the same but with an AI model working behind the scenes to adjust the object to fit the scene it's being pasted into.