4 ms·

How is what any of these image generators are doing any different from myself when I (try to) make art? I draw on my experiences and senses and try to reproduce

How is what any of these image generators are doing any different from myself when I (try to) make art? I draw on my experiences and senses and try to reproduce a picture and those experiences include natural things I've seen as well as art others have made. More so how are these image generators any different from text generators like ChatGTP? I feel like if first tool out from these AI gates was a bot that wrote good-enough-to-use code, no one would have batted an eye. Everyone would just go "yeah we told you that those pesky programmers would eventually automate themselves out of jobs", but since it is rendering pictures which most of the populace can appreciate and it is a skill that is easy enough for literally any child to pick up, but requires a lot of dedication to master all of a sudden this is theft and should be illegal. I really hope this lawsuit or whatever doesn't go anywhere, because it will not change anything. The genie is already out of the bottle as far as image generators are concerned - however it means that we the people won't get whatever comes next. Whatever comes next will be tightly held by big corporations and they alone will reap the benefits, whatever they may be.

dns_snek 4y ago
> More so how are these image generators any different from text generators like ChatGTP? I've spotted this pattern a couple of times and this sort of circular reasoning seems concerning. Whenever one of (Stable diffusion, Copilot, ChatGPT) comes up in a discussion, their legitimacy seems to be swiftly justified by existence of the other two, even though they're all uniquely problematic in how they wash away attribution and licensing.
- nextlevelwizard 4y ago
  The thing is that no one seems to have these concerns with ChatGPT. When DALL-E came out it was touted as end of artists since now everyone could "just make their own art", but most people just see ChatGPT as a toy. This is not circular reasoning, more observation of what people value. Since everyone can "Google and gather information" ChatGPT isn't valued enough, but since most people don't know how to draw DALL-E and Stable Diffusion are seen as industry destroyers.
  - onionisafruit 4y ago
    It’s interesting to read your perspective. I feel like I’ve seen more doom-saying about co-pilot and ChatGPT than I have about DALL-E and friends. But that may be selection bias.
    - Ajedi32 4y ago
      I think there's plenty of doom saying with both. LLMs and diffusion models are both highly disruptive technologies, and I think it's fair to speculate on what the impact of that will be. The difference is I don't see book authors and news writers trying to sue OpenAI for "stealing" their articles and not providing attribution, or creating websites that try to divine which specific book chapters or news articles ChatGPT used to generate any particular response (as if that's at all representative of how GPT works).
    - nextlevelwizard 4y ago
      Well, yeah, copilot had bunch of clueless people yell how it would make programming so much easier, but it was pretty obvious for anyone who used it that it was no where near ready do replace anyone. It was more like a good generic LSP

dns_snek 4y ago

> More so how are these image generators any different from text generators like ChatGTP? I've spotted this pattern a couple of times and this sort of circular reasoning seems concerning. Whenever one of (Stable diffusion, Copilot, ChatGPT) comes up in a discussion, their legitimacy seems to be swiftly justified by existence of the other two, even though they're all uniquely problematic in how they wash away attribution and licensing.

nextlevelwizard 4y ago
The thing is that no one seems to have these concerns with ChatGPT. When DALL-E came out it was touted as end of artists since now everyone could "just make their own art", but most people just see ChatGPT as a toy. This is not circular reasoning, more observation of what people value. Since everyone can "Google and gather information" ChatGPT isn't valued enough, but since most people don't know how to draw DALL-E and Stable Diffusion are seen as industry destroyers.
- onionisafruit 4y ago
  It’s interesting to read your perspective. I feel like I’ve seen more doom-saying about co-pilot and ChatGPT than I have about DALL-E and friends. But that may be selection bias.
  - Ajedi32 4y ago
    I think there's plenty of doom saying with both. LLMs and diffusion models are both highly disruptive technologies, and I think it's fair to speculate on what the impact of that will be. The difference is I don't see book authors and news writers trying to sue OpenAI for "stealing" their articles and not providing attribution, or creating websites that try to divine which specific book chapters or news articles ChatGPT used to generate any particular response (as if that's at all representative of how GPT works).
  - nextlevelwizard 4y ago
    Well, yeah, copilot had bunch of clueless people yell how it would make programming so much easier, but it was pretty obvious for anyone who used it that it was no where near ready do replace anyone. It was more like a good generic LSP