3 ms·
Not an issue if they train an ai model by their own accord. The issue is the prevalent theft among ai companies that simply seal people's work to train propriet
by gumballindie 3y ago
Not an issue if they train an ai model by their own accord. The issue is the prevalent theft among ai companies that simply seal people's work to train proprietary models.
- whywhywhywhy 3y agoI agree it’s wrong if it’s proprietary. But I think open models trained on scraped data regardless of where it came from are valuable enough to offset any upset about the data. If this was all locked behind Adobe they could charge 10k a month for access (if you think that sounds ridiculous look at autocad licensing) now it’s free for the first time in decades artists have a chance to own and control the next generation of tools and make them entirely free. Sad to see short sighted ones bickering about slighted that they were part of the data. Real small picture thinking that will screw them over in the long run.
- gumballindie 3y ago> open models trained on scraped data regardless of where it came from are valuable enough That's theft.
- CaptainFever 3y agoCopying is not theft. Stealing a thing leaves one less left Copying it makes one thing more; that’s what copying’s for. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4)
- whywhywhywhy 3y agoIt's not and plenty of pieces of art only exist in good quality today because of what you think is theft. You're wrong and things are not black and white.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]