3 ms·

I have no clues about laws and stuff and as a software engineer, I'd say please replace me by machines i dont care all the contrary, let's go. But please, plea

I have no clues about laws and stuff and as a software engineer, I'd say please replace me by machines i dont care all the contrary, let's go. But please, please, protect art making from machines. These paints made in those caves werent done during work hours, it was probably the first forms of leasure our ancestors experienced. The first forms of enjoyment in the rude life of early humans. I think there is some higher order aspect to art that's related to our essential well being. All Im saying is protect it; im not saying AI shouldnt be used. It could certainly render art making even more fun. Maybe limit the resolution of generated pictures for example.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Hoasi 4y ago
While I appreciate your comment and the sentiment, and believe that artists whose work companies trained models on without their consent should get their rights honoured, I disagree that the art field needs any extra protection. There will be innovation outside of the latent space thanks to the AI art movement, that will be a positive development. An enormous body of artworks has zero online presence and exists outside of its reach, at least for now. However, art reflects its time, and generative, machine learning, text to image art will all influence artists in unseen ways. Offline artists are watching. Nobody needs a computer to do outstanding art. Even the most primitive tools can produce unmatched results in the real world. That's the beauty of making art. Models cannot even begin to touch it. Good artists have nothing to fear about ML as a tool, which is fantastic and promising as such. It's undoubtly diruptive. As image-making takes less time, the value of an individual image will tend to zero. Prices will go down, and artists will adapt. That's what they do. Sure, there will be a bunch of profeteers and imposters using AI. Art always had its share of those. Art is a dream field for fraudsters. A known issue since we commercialised art, because it carries intangible value. Hence why NFTs started with art. That doesn't make the whole initiative a fraud. That said, digital artists who have copyright issues should absolutely fight back. The gray areas around training model with art by living artists needs an open discussion.
thewakalix 4y ago
That seems difficult when Stable Diffusion has already been freely released. It’s futile to apply artificial restrictions to libre software when they can just as easily be removed!
wvenable 4y ago
A lot of art is produced like sweat shop labor right now -- just think about the visual effects in any recent Marvel movie. And why isn't software art? I write software in my leisure time for fun. The line you're drawing is entirely meaningless.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Hoasi 4y ago

While I appreciate your comment and the sentiment, and believe that artists whose work companies trained models on without their consent should get their rights honoured, I disagree that the art field needs any extra protection. There will be innovation outside of the latent space thanks to the AI art movement, that will be a positive development. An enormous body of artworks has zero online presence and exists outside of its reach, at least for now. However, art reflects its time, and generative, machine learning, text to image art will all influence artists in unseen ways. Offline artists are watching. Nobody needs a computer to do outstanding art. Even the most primitive tools can produce unmatched results in the real world. That's the beauty of making art. Models cannot even begin to touch it. Good artists have nothing to fear about ML as a tool, which is fantastic and promising as such. It's undoubtly diruptive. As image-making takes less time, the value of an individual image will tend to zero. Prices will go down, and artists will adapt. That's what they do. Sure, there will be a bunch of profeteers and imposters using AI. Art always had its share of those. Art is a dream field for fraudsters. A known issue since we commercialised art, because it carries intangible value. Hence why NFTs started with art. That doesn't make the whole initiative a fraud. That said, digital artists who have copyright issues should absolutely fight back. The gray areas around training model with art by living artists needs an open discussion.

thewakalix 4y ago

That seems difficult when Stable Diffusion has already been freely released. It’s futile to apply artificial restrictions to libre software when they can just as easily be removed!

wvenable 4y ago

A lot of art is produced like sweat shop labor right now -- just think about the visual effects in any recent Marvel movie. And why isn't software art? I write software in my leisure time for fun. The line you're drawing is entirely meaningless.