3 ms·

Stable Diffusion uses all of the art as input and this is actually incredibly important. In fact, any specific piece of art can be removed and it will still wor

Stable Diffusion uses all of the art as input and this is actually incredibly important. In fact, any specific piece of art can be removed and it will still work the same and this is also incredibly important. Both show that there is no intent for individual infringement, with along with no infringing material being produced and the significant non-infringing commercial use like family photo touch-ups, it makes for a very strong narrative for the defense! To change lanes to art for a second… When I’m using a tool like Logic I can coax drums, Hammond Organ, 70s analog synths, out of my laptop. I can’t make any of those sounds with my body. I need a tool. Without Logic I would have to own a drum kit (which I happen to do), know how to play it, know how to record it… with logic I just click a dozen times and I’ve got a drummer playing four-on-the-floor. So when I do work with a real drummer don’t tell them exactly what to play on a grid like with a drum sampler in Logic, rather they just listen in contribute. Logic has a virtual drummer that does basically the same. How different is it to fire up another piece of software and employ a virtual painter? Ok, shift back over to technology and creative work… what are the pros and cons of drum samplers? Don’t they put drummers out of business? Isn’t the trade-off that now a lot more people have access to nice sounding drums and that the world has more music?

jacquesm 4y ago
> In fact, any specific piece of art can be removed and it will still work the same and this is also incredibly important. This is provably false: if any specific piece can be removed and there is no difference then you can keep doing that until there is no art left. I'd bet a very substantial amount of money that the output at that point will definitely have changed. Induction is a powerful thing.
- williamcotton 4y ago
  I didn’t say remove all the art, I said remove a specific piece of art. No one needs to do thought experiments. Remove all the plaintiff’s works, retrain the model, and the model is still just as useful. Or if we want to do thought experiments, randomly remove any thousand images and the tool is still just as useful. If it’s random, not specific images, that are removed, then it is non-specific images that power the tool… yes, millions of those images, so a specific quantity is required but no specific works.

jacquesm 4y ago

> In fact, any specific piece of art can be removed and it will still work the same and this is also incredibly important. This is provably false: if any specific piece can be removed and there is no difference then you can keep doing that until there is no art left. I'd bet a very substantial amount of money that the output at that point will definitely have changed. Induction is a powerful thing.

williamcotton 4y ago
I didn’t say remove all the art, I said remove a specific piece of art. No one needs to do thought experiments. Remove all the plaintiff’s works, retrain the model, and the model is still just as useful. Or if we want to do thought experiments, randomly remove any thousand images and the tool is still just as useful. If it’s random, not specific images, that are removed, then it is non-specific images that power the tool… yes, millions of those images, so a specific quantity is required but no specific works.