3 ms·
To what extent are we ripping off the photographers? Weren't the models trained on their hard work? Have we reached a point where we've bounded art within the
by kerblang 4y ago
To what extent are we ripping off the photographers? Weren't the models trained on their hard work?
Have we reached a point where we've bounded art within the data models are trained on?
Have we imposed a limit on ideas as a realm of "what came before" and implicitly decided that any "after" is a pointless exercise without knowing whether that's even true?
- nathanaldensr 4y agoExcellent questions, and I was thinking the same thing. In my opinion, AI-generated art or images are not as impressive as they might seem at first purely because there is no real imagination involved. It's an art simulacrum. A more accurate title would be "This picture of food does not exist."
- asiachick 4y agopretty much every art I've ever drawn was influenced by things I've drawn previously. How is that different?
- SamBam 4y ago> To what extent are we ripping off the photographers? Photographers in general, certainly, but no individual photographer enough that it could ever matter, legally or ethically. > implicitly decided that any "after" is a pointless exercise... Seems a little pessimistic. I believe that we will still be able to recognize and appreciate new art.
- fancymcpoopoo 4y agothis argument is like saying you kill 100,000 people, fine. that's generally hurting a lot of people but no individual person, so no ethical problems m8
- SamBam 4y agoBizarre comparison. Each individual in your example is killed. Having more killed doesn't make it better. In the photographers example, each photographer is fractionally damaged, with the more photographers the less the damage. Similarly, GPT3 is ripping off the words of everyone who has ever written anything on the internet, but to such a miniscule degree that none of us could ever have cause for complaint.