4 ms·
going to take some HN karma hit for this but i just don't get it. the price of anything you sell (or do not wish to give away for free) is not how much it cost
by twism 3y ago
going to take some HN karma hit for this but i just don't get it. the price of anything you sell (or do not wish to give away for free) is not how much it cost to build but how much someone else is willing to pay for it.
If you think the work is so great. charge for it. let the market decide. i think twitter/x does this now somewhat.
how is this not similar to thinking google owes me money because my tweet appeared in their search results?
- rideontime 3y agoYou seem to be missing the point. The artist has already compromised their personal ethics by choosing to post their work to social media. Now, with AI, they don't even have a choice in the matter.
- twism 3y agonobody is forced to post to social media
- rideontime 3y ago"And now even that nominal opt-in option is gone. They just take it."
- twism 3y agoyou've given it to them
- rideontime 3y agoMuch in the same way I've "given" my wallet to a thief by leaving it my unlocked car.
- twism 3y agohow is posting something in public space analogous to leaving an item in an unlocked car where either you either did not mean to leave it there and/or leave the car unlocked?
- rideontime 3y agoWhen did I say I did so unintentionally?
- dotnet00 3y agoWhy post if you're not going to argue in good faith?
- spencerflem 3y agoIf they don't link to you, but instead take the content of the link and show it alongside ads, they do owe you money, at least in some jurisdictions.
- twism 3y agobut google doesn't do that ... they only show you a list of links (and granted some tidbit content you the web site can specify) pertaining to the search ... the product from google are those pages of list of links which is really not dissimilar to what midjourney is giving you which is a result from an array of public(?) works if i understand (not an AI/ML expert)
- spencerflem 3y agoGoogle used to do more of that sorta stuff: amp pages, google images would not link to the original page, full summaries in the "rich results" box etc. but got in trouble with lawsuits from Getty Images & others. My impression of generative AI is that yes, it is not any one specific result, which is in some ways even worse because artists cannot get any credit or compensation whatsoever despite the end result depending at least partially on their work.
- jprete 3y agoThe market doesn't help the post author precisely because GenAI researchers and organizations are claiming fair use in the particular way they are. The only way an artist can prevent them from appropriating artwork without permission is to somehow prevent anyone, anytime, ever from placing it into a training data set. If you make something interesting and share one copy with a friend, and that friend shares it with one GenAI researcher friend who wants training data - boom, it'll be in the training set and your only option was to never share it at all with anyone.