Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 I don’t think so. No more than a story produced by a generative AI is literature. I think Generative AI is a magic plagiarism machine and artists and authors should be compensated for LLMs using their work to produce output. Discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 (edited) I remember when Photoshop came out, and all the accompanying handwringing. Like Photoshp, AI is a tool. Nothing more. In order to get worthwile results, you need to know how to use it. And as for the plagiarism. Don't make me laugh. Or are we expected to believe that the artists you want to protect never copied copyrighted material when learning how to draw? Learning to draw is all abput copying stuff. That's how humans learn, and that's how AIs learn. Tell me, what is the difference? Edited April 24 by Spockydog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Spockydog said: I remember when Photoshop came out, and all the accompanying handwringing. Like Photoshp, AI is a tool. Nothing more. In order to get worthwile results, you need to know how to use it. Typing in “make this picture” write this story”. Is not creative. It is not art. The people who are having their actual work harvested to facilitate LLM output deserve compensation. Edited April 24 by Ser Scot A Ellison Larry of the Lawn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentat Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 You're defining art and literature through the process of creation (which, to you, must involve a human) rather than through the result itself. You're also conflating a different, separate issue (that of what is the adequate compensation for artists whose work is used in the process of training an AI). If you read a short, beautiful poem which inspires powerful emotions in you and I later told you it had been produced by a thousand chimpanzees with typewriters or by Scrabble letter tiles falling randomly on a board, is that poem not art? If I train an AI to produce pictures of still-life paintings in the style of 17th century Dutch masters (whose work is in the public domain) and succeed to the point where neither you nor an expert can tell the difference between the AI's output and the real thing, is that not art? These are far more complex and philosophical questions than you seem to think. The hairy bear, kissdbyfire and Knight Of Winter 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 1 minute ago, Mentat said: You're defining art and literature through the process of creation (which, to you, must involve a human) rather than through the result itself. You're also conflating a different, separate issue (that of what is the adequate compensation for artists whose work is used in the process of training an AI). If you read a short, beautiful poem which inspires powerful emotions in you and I later told you it had been produced by a thousand chimpanzees with typewriters or by Scrabble letter tiles falling randomly on a board, is that poem not art? If I train an AI to produce pictures of still-life paintings in the style of 17th century Dutch masters (whose work is in the public domain) and succeed to the point where neither you nor an expert can tell the difference between the AI's output and the real thing, is that not art? These are far more complex and philosophical questions than you seem to think. I support actual artists and writers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Typing in “make this picture” write this story”. Is not creative. It is not art. Scot, have you ever tried to get a bespoke image, for something specific that doesn't yet exist, out of an AI? I've tried, several times, to save myself some money by generating some concept art for my business. It was impossible, and I am pretty creative. I got nothing worthwile and in the end sprung for the £1500 to get it done professionally, by a human. Edited April 24 by Spockydog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 It's fucking theft is what it is. Larry of the Lawn, Ser Scot A Ellison and JGP 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 I had this argument a couple years ago on Twitter. The developers of art generators knew exactly what they were doing and I'd personally hang them up by their tiny, pucker sucked thumbs. I had one interaction with some derp who was glad that artist control of the means of production was over, and called me an Artpig Drawslave, and I just... [dead] Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 Just now, polishgenius said: It's fucking theft is what it is. Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 12 minutes ago, Spockydog said: I remember when Photoshop came out, and all the accompanying handwringing. Like Photoshp, AI is a tool. Nothing more. In order to get worthwile results, you need to know how to use it. And as for the plagiarism. Don't make me laugh. Or are we expected to believe that the artists you want to protect never copied copyrighted material when learning how to draw? Learning to draw is all abput copying stuff. That's how humans learn, and that's how AIs learn. Tell me, what is the difference? Dude, your ass. Quit talking out it :p Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 3 minutes ago, Spockydog said: Scot, have you ever tried to get a bespoke image, for something specific that doesn't yet exist, out of an AI? I've tried, several times, to save myself a couple of grand by generating some concept art for my business. It was impossible, and I am pretty creative. I got nothing worthwile and in the end sprung for the £1500 to get it done professionally, by a human. Don’t care. I support flesh and blood artists and writers who are having their work sampled and copied while those using generative AI claim they are artists and writers too. They are not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 (edited) Okay, but someone explain what's the difference between a professional artist spending their youth and young adulthood copying work by other artists (cos that's what they all do - every single fucking one of them) whilst developing their own style. And then should these artists be forced to pay royalties to all the artists whose work they copied while honing their skills? Edited April 24 by Spockydog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 Get over it. The world has changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 Just now, Spockydog said: Get over it. The world has changed. No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 6 minutes ago, polishgenius said: It's fucking theft is what it is. Of what, precisely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 2 minutes ago, Spockydog said: Get over it. The world has changed. Did you support the Film industry sampling actors once and then using that actors image without further compensation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: No. Do me a favour. Pop over to Dalle and knock me up some concept art of the Lazyscrog deployed inside a greenhouse on the surface of Mars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spockydog Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Did you support the Film industry sampling actors once and then using that actors image without further compensation? No. That is completely different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 For the record, I was a pro artist. Illustration and animation. Spocky: You know, I usually find myself agreeing with your positions, but I'd suggest you do some digging on how the generators were trained. Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 Just now, Spockydog said: Do me a favour. Pop over to Dalle and knock me up some concept art of the Lazyscrog deployed inside a greenhouse on the surface of Mars. I don’t claim to be an artist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.