5 ms·

A huge company is using unpaid artist's labour to create tools that will reduce the potential for these and all future artists to get any paid work at all in th

A huge company is using unpaid artist's labour to create tools that will reduce the potential for these and all future artists to get any paid work at all in the future. It seems like signing up as the volunteer with the goal of derailing the company as much as possible is a highly valid form of ptotest.

Ratelman 2y ago
There are better ways to protest than violating a legally binding agreement - seems more like an emotional reaction than a properly thought through protest.
- bryant 2y ago
  In fairness, some of the most effective protests have gone much further than that — they've broken laws. (See basically every civil rights protest) Breaking contracts seems tame by comparison.
  - Ratelman 2y ago
    Fair point - and I suppose we are on HACKERnews - and they are OPENAI, so helping them be more open is an effective form of protest.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- Retr0id 2y ago
  The most effective forms of protest usually are illegal
  - Ratelman 2y ago
    True, true - didn't think that one through
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    It's risky though, if the protest is annoying or damaging enough (antisocial behaviour basically) it can actively turn people away from your position. As in "Oh these are a bunch of insane/evil/violent etc people and that type of person tends to have this type of view, I as a good person do not have these kinds of views"
  - immibis 2y ago
    the ONLY effective forms of protest
- esperent 2y ago
  You'd rather a politely worded letter to the artist's local newspaper?
  - Ratelman 2y ago
    Meh, not entirely sure what would work better. Having read through the huggingface post a few times now, suppose it's less of an emotional reaction, more actual protest to abusive practices.
  - vntok 2y ago
    I'd rather they do... art? Why not organize a worldwide protest where every participant produces and shares Art denouncing generative AI? "AI might produce single pieces but this collective work, this is what AI can't do" and so on. What they're doing is so weird and ineffective in contrast, it baffles me.
    - esperent 2y ago
      > Why not organize a worldwide protest where every participant produces and shares Art denouncing generative AI Ah yes, a feel good protest that can be completely ignored by everyone, especially OpenAI. Even better, maybe OpenAI could fund it? That way they get to claim they hear the protests but they don't have to actually change anything.
      - vntok 2y ago
        Say everyone completely ignores the protest; surely that's a valid data point that should in itself make those artists reflect on their own positions & ideas? Maybe, just maybe, people in the general public actually value generative AI, regardless of what artists think about it?
    - Philpax 2y ago
      For three hours, they gave everyone access to create videos with Sora, some of which could very well be art. Not only that, but the form in which they did this and the statement they made could also be considered art. I think they've done well here. In their statement, they make it clear that they're not opposed to the use of AI in art: they're opposed to the abuse of artists to pretend that OpenAI is doing this for their sake. This serves their perspective better than any juvenile anti-AI quilt could have.
- Vampiero 2y ago
  If you want to make a legally binding agreement you better pay me first.
- tiahura 2y ago
  They’re artists. Theory of mind is important here.
- rafram 2y ago
  I’m comfortable saying that there has never been a good protest in modern history that didn’t violate a legally binding agreement.
71bw 2y ago
>It seems like signing up as the volunteer with the goal of derailing the company as much as possible is a highly valid form of ptotest. It's the most immature and pseudointellectual form of protest I can think of. "Oh I am scared of the technology that's coming regardless, let me try and screw everybody else over as well!"
- Ratelman 2y ago
  Link to the post: https://huggingface.co/spaces/PR-Puppets/PR-Puppet-Sora https://huggingface.co/spaces/PR-Puppets/PR-Puppet-Sora If you read through it, they clearly state: "We are not against the use of AI technology as a tool for the arts (if we were, we probably wouldn't have been invited to this program). What we don't agree with is how this artist program has been rolled out and how the tool is shaping up ahead of a possible public release. We are sharing this to the world in the hopes that OpenAI becomes more open, more artist friendly and supports the arts beyond PR stunts."
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - meheleventyone 2y ago
    This is super interesting and seems to be the first organized push back against the platformization of 'creators' where the power imbalance is so great that corps expect free labor for the chance to become one of few outsized successes and it's whitewashed as 'democratization'.
- xkqd 2y ago
  Well, both of those are subjective terms but if it’s effective it’s effective. The most effective movements are usually a combination of protest and civil disobedience. Considering livelihoods are under threat I wouldn’t condone nor blame anyone for even going one step further.
  - rat9988 2y ago
    Yes, and bombing openai's headquarters is effective too. Effectiveness isn't a moral compass.
eek04_ 2y ago
> A huge company is using unpaid artist's labour to create tools that will reduce the potential for these and all future artists to get any paid work at all in the future. "Will" is a strong claim. If the Jevons Paradox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox) applies in this case - and it may well do so - the new technology will lower costs, and the increased productivity will increase demand. If so, it will require artists to work in a different way but they'll earn more. The Baumol Effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect) may also lead to increased wages.
- kranke155 2y ago
  No that won’t happen. Audiovisual entertainment is already beyond capacity. We make more stuff than people have the time to consume it. The idea that this will raise wages is hilarious. I don’t see how that would be possible.
  - starfezzy 2y ago
    Tbh a lot of art people want money for is garbage, and most money goes to a few corporations anyways. It would be nice to see that system rearranged. Even if there’s more art, money could instead fund artistic ventures people actually want rather than keeping powerful entities afloat/entrenched. Maybe the number of major corporations decreases (towards a permanent handful) as the number of paid artists increases (towards basically everyone who could desire payment for art that’s actually in demand).
    - kranke155 2y ago
      A system being rearranged is tempting, and yes, a very likely outcome. Hollywood depends on its advantage in production values, which is quickly being eroded by AI. However, if recent history is a guide, we won't see an increase in the number of paid artists, I'd say looking at the music industry, what we saw was the increase in the number of artists in general, but success seems to me as fickle as ever. Now, apparently, thanks to Ticketmaster monopoly, even live tours barely make any money and musicians are turning to Onlyfans (not porn, just direct support) to make money. So here's the state of the music industry (partially due to unchallenged monopolies): You, for the most part, don't make money making music and distributing it online You don't make money from a live tour either. Amazing outcome for an industry where the cost of production and distribution has collapsed. No one makes money except for the monopolies in streaming (Spotify) and ticketing (Ticketmaster). Without monopoly protections, that's what you get. Thankfully, there's a bit more competition in the audiovisual realm with Youtube and multiple streamers. Still, I don't know what to think about what might happen. Most artists / people in audiovisual production will likely make less money. Some will likely make a lot of money. My (kind of unfounded atm) assumption is that AI will just increase the differences in Paretto distribution of income, making the top 20% very rich and the bottom 80% very poor. Before genAI, you had a very large and vibrant VFX industry, with relatively well paid workers, which is likely to be cut down by huge numbers (it's already been cut by around 50%).

Ratelman 2y ago

There are better ways to protest than violating a legally binding agreement - seems more like an emotional reaction than a properly thought through protest.

bryant 2y ago
In fairness, some of the most effective protests have gone much further than that — they've broken laws. (See basically every civil rights protest) Breaking contracts seems tame by comparison.
- Ratelman 2y ago
  Fair point - and I suppose we are on HACKERnews - and they are OPENAI, so helping them be more open is an effective form of protest.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
Retr0id 2y ago
The most effective forms of protest usually are illegal
- Ratelman 2y ago
  True, true - didn't think that one through
- HPsquared 2y ago
  It's risky though, if the protest is annoying or damaging enough (antisocial behaviour basically) it can actively turn people away from your position. As in "Oh these are a bunch of insane/evil/violent etc people and that type of person tends to have this type of view, I as a good person do not have these kinds of views"
- immibis 2y ago
  the ONLY effective forms of protest
esperent 2y ago
You'd rather a politely worded letter to the artist's local newspaper?
- Ratelman 2y ago
  Meh, not entirely sure what would work better. Having read through the huggingface post a few times now, suppose it's less of an emotional reaction, more actual protest to abusive practices.
- vntok 2y ago
  I'd rather they do... art? Why not organize a worldwide protest where every participant produces and shares Art denouncing generative AI? "AI might produce single pieces but this collective work, this is what AI can't do" and so on. What they're doing is so weird and ineffective in contrast, it baffles me.
  - esperent 2y ago
    > Why not organize a worldwide protest where every participant produces and shares Art denouncing generative AI Ah yes, a feel good protest that can be completely ignored by everyone, especially OpenAI. Even better, maybe OpenAI could fund it? That way they get to claim they hear the protests but they don't have to actually change anything.
    - vntok 2y ago
      Say everyone completely ignores the protest; surely that's a valid data point that should in itself make those artists reflect on their own positions & ideas? Maybe, just maybe, people in the general public actually value generative AI, regardless of what artists think about it?
  - Philpax 2y ago
    For three hours, they gave everyone access to create videos with Sora, some of which could very well be art. Not only that, but the form in which they did this and the statement they made could also be considered art. I think they've done well here. In their statement, they make it clear that they're not opposed to the use of AI in art: they're opposed to the abuse of artists to pretend that OpenAI is doing this for their sake. This serves their perspective better than any juvenile anti-AI quilt could have.
Vampiero 2y ago
If you want to make a legally binding agreement you better pay me first.
tiahura 2y ago
They’re artists. Theory of mind is important here.
rafram 2y ago
I’m comfortable saying that there has never been a good protest in modern history that didn’t violate a legally binding agreement.

71bw 2y ago

>It seems like signing up as the volunteer with the goal of derailing the company as much as possible is a highly valid form of ptotest. It's the most immature and pseudointellectual form of protest I can think of. "Oh I am scared of the technology that's coming regardless, let me try and screw everybody else over as well!"

Ratelman 2y ago
Link to the post: https://huggingface.co/spaces/PR-Puppets/PR-Puppet-Sora https://huggingface.co/spaces/PR-Puppets/PR-Puppet-Sora If you read through it, they clearly state: "We are not against the use of AI technology as a tool for the arts (if we were, we probably wouldn't have been invited to this program). What we don't agree with is how this artist program has been rolled out and how the tool is shaping up ahead of a possible public release. We are sharing this to the world in the hopes that OpenAI becomes more open, more artist friendly and supports the arts beyond PR stunts."
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- meheleventyone 2y ago
  This is super interesting and seems to be the first organized push back against the platformization of 'creators' where the power imbalance is so great that corps expect free labor for the chance to become one of few outsized successes and it's whitewashed as 'democratization'.
xkqd 2y ago
Well, both of those are subjective terms but if it’s effective it’s effective. The most effective movements are usually a combination of protest and civil disobedience. Considering livelihoods are under threat I wouldn’t condone nor blame anyone for even going one step further.
- rat9988 2y ago
  Yes, and bombing openai's headquarters is effective too. Effectiveness isn't a moral compass.

eek04_ 2y ago

> A huge company is using unpaid artist's labour to create tools that will reduce the potential for these and all future artists to get any paid work at all in the future. "Will" is a strong claim. If the Jevons Paradox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox) applies in this case - and it may well do so - the new technology will lower costs, and the increased productivity will increase demand. If so, it will require artists to work in a different way but they'll earn more. The Baumol Effect (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect) may also lead to increased wages.

kranke155 2y ago
No that won’t happen. Audiovisual entertainment is already beyond capacity. We make more stuff than people have the time to consume it. The idea that this will raise wages is hilarious. I don’t see how that would be possible.
- starfezzy 2y ago
  Tbh a lot of art people want money for is garbage, and most money goes to a few corporations anyways. It would be nice to see that system rearranged. Even if there’s more art, money could instead fund artistic ventures people actually want rather than keeping powerful entities afloat/entrenched. Maybe the number of major corporations decreases (towards a permanent handful) as the number of paid artists increases (towards basically everyone who could desire payment for art that’s actually in demand).
  - kranke155 2y ago
    A system being rearranged is tempting, and yes, a very likely outcome. Hollywood depends on its advantage in production values, which is quickly being eroded by AI. However, if recent history is a guide, we won't see an increase in the number of paid artists, I'd say looking at the music industry, what we saw was the increase in the number of artists in general, but success seems to me as fickle as ever. Now, apparently, thanks to Ticketmaster monopoly, even live tours barely make any money and musicians are turning to Onlyfans (not porn, just direct support) to make money. So here's the state of the music industry (partially due to unchallenged monopolies): You, for the most part, don't make money making music and distributing it online You don't make money from a live tour either. Amazing outcome for an industry where the cost of production and distribution has collapsed. No one makes money except for the monopolies in streaming (Spotify) and ticketing (Ticketmaster). Without monopoly protections, that's what you get. Thankfully, there's a bit more competition in the audiovisual realm with Youtube and multiple streamers. Still, I don't know what to think about what might happen. Most artists / people in audiovisual production will likely make less money. Some will likely make a lot of money. My (kind of unfounded atm) assumption is that AI will just increase the differences in Paretto distribution of income, making the top 20% very rich and the bottom 80% very poor. Before genAI, you had a very large and vibrant VFX industry, with relatively well paid workers, which is likely to be cut down by huge numbers (it's already been cut by around 50%).