3 ms·
With StableDiffusion in particular, their business model (so far) is charging for an easy to use front-end. At the same time they've (essentially) given away th
by gdubs 4y ago
With StableDiffusion in particular, their business model (so far) is charging for an easy to use front-end. At the same time they've (essentially) given away the model for free for people to develop on. To me, personally, this seems like a fair trade in the sense of giving back to humanity from something that was made from the collective imaginations of humanity, and finding a way to also recoup on investment. (The model didn't train itself, and GPU time isn't free.) Everyone essentially benefits from this new technology that enables completely new forms of expression.
Now, could someone choose to use it in a completely derivative way to essentially rip-off a well known artist? Sure. That would be really crappy to do to someone. And also a very brain dead use of something so nearly infinite in its capabilities for generating new things.
Could art directors replace illustrators, filmmakers replace concept artists? Sure. But I think something different is likely to happen which is that artists will use these tools to go further. The "bicycle of the mind" Steve Jobs always used to talk about.
As someone who put in the proverbial ten thousand hours in art and technology, I'm completely excited about what this tech enables.
Now, that doesn't mean people's fears aren't valid. Desktop publishing decimated the traditional printmaking industry. Many artisans lost their living. But many small independent publishers were suddenly able to put out their own material to a vast audience. Similar with the internet.
I think it ultimately comes back around to things like universal basic income, or what have you. Rather than taking away amazing tools, we should solve the problem of economic fear that automation and displacement has and continues to bring.
Anyway, this is all so new that these are just my roughly formed personal opinions. I could very well be wrong! But I feel like a lot of the debate is superficial. That there's a lot of misconception about how these models really work. And it also reveals a lot of holes in our own understanding of what it means to think, be original, etc.
- peteradio 4y ago> And also a very brain dead use of something so nearly infinite in its capabilities for generating new things. What would be brain dead about making lots of money? The popular artist has already found market fit and potentially has an easy corpus of work on which to train.
- gdubs 4y agoYea fair point! It sounds like you're actually describing an artist using the tool to accelerate their own work, which is a cool use case. But even if something IS completely derivative, some would say it's fair game. I'm not trying to judge — just trying to point out that if someone chooses to blatantly just copy another living artist, it seems like that's more on them than the model itself. And I personally love remixing styles! But I find that adding even one additional artist to a prompt is more interesting — you immediately get somewhere completely novel.