Pro-AI argument of art not being theft

WHY AI ISN'T COPYING ELI 5 AKA STRAIGHT TO THE POINT SIMPLE EXPLANATION OF DIFFUSION MODELS WE TAKE A PICTURE OF A THING, LET'S SAY A DOG, AND WE TELL TO THE COMPUTER: "HEY COMPUTER, PLEASE GRADUALLY TURN THIS PICTURE INTO NOISE, MEMORIZE EVERY STEP WHILE DOING SO" ORIGINAL PIC ORIGINAL PIC OF COMPLETELY RANDOM NOISE WAIT A MINUITE, IT'S NOT THE SAME DOG! STEP 1 ORIGINAL PIC OF COMPLETELY RANDOM NOISE STEP 4 STEP 2 NOW WE TAKE A PICTURE OF ACTUAL RANDOM NOISE AND WE TELL THE COMPUTER: "HEY COMPUTER, PLEASE PLAY THE 'DOG TO NOISE ALGORITHM' BUT REVERSED" PANE STEP 4 Beep-boop ok, done, I'll save this in my memory as "Dog to Noise Algorithm" STEP 3 STEP 3 Yes, because you started from actual random noise. I've learned how to generate a dog from noise. I'm not copypasting anything STEP 3 STEP 2 SO NOW IF WE TEACH THE COMPUTER ABOUT THE COLOR BLACK, AND WE THEN ASK: "HEY COMPUTER, PLEASE PLAY THE 'COLOR BLACK TO NOISE ALGORITHM' BUT REVERSED, AND THE 'DOG TO NOISE' ALGORITHM BUT REVERSED, AT THE SAME TIME" STEP 2 da STEP 4 "I'm an artist, similarly to how I would get paid to give an art lesson, I should be paid if you train an Al with my artworks" STEP 1 TADAAAN! YOU NOW HAVE A COMPLETELY ORIGINAL BLACK DOG! ADDENDUM FEEL FREE TO CROP AWAY THIS PART IF YOU'RE JUST EXPLAINING THE TECH "Yes but AI does it way faster than a human, we should be protected from it, the competition will become unfair" STEP 1 IF YOU ACTUALLY HAD TO TEACH SOMEBODY, YES, BUT THIS IS LIKE LOOKING AT SOMEONE'S FINISHED WORK AND LEARNING. WE ALL DO IT, THAT'S HOW HUMAN BRAIN WORKS. YOU LOOK AT OTHER PEOPLE'S WORK ALL DAY, AND LEARN FROM THEM FOR FREE, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. YOU PAY AN ARTIST WHEN THEY ORGANIZE A CLASS, NOT WHEN YOU STUDY THEIR WORK AND LEARN THROUGH OBSERVATION. "If AI doesn't copy, why do I see watermarks and signatures in it?" SLOWING DOWN EVOLUTION BECAUSE IT'S UNPLEASANT TO HAVE TO ADAPT ISN'T SOUND LOGIC. THERE'S AN INCREDIBLE POTENTIAL IN THIS TECH FOR ARTISTS WHO ADOPT IT. THEY WILL BE ABLE TO INCREASE THEIR WORKFLOW BY HUNDREDS OF TIMES, SIMILARLY TO HOW E-COMMERCE PUSHED THE BUSINESS THAT LEARNED TO USE IT. LIFE ITSELF IS ABOUT ADAPTATION. LOOK AT HOW TODAY WE NEED MORE ENGINEERS AND LESS FACTORY WORKERS OR FARMERS. WOULD YOU SAY THAT IT MAKES SENSE TO BAN CINEMA BECAUSE BOOK WRITERS HAD TO DIVERSIFY THEIR SKILLSET BECAUSE OF ITS COMPETITION? "I don't care how the technology works, I've seen an AI generated image that is basically identical to an artist's picture. That's plagiarism!" AI ISN'T SENTIENT NOR INTELLIGENT. IF YOU SHOW IT A PAINTING THAT HAS A SIGNATURE ON IT, AND THEN ASK IT TO GENERATE A PAINTING, AI WILL ASSUME THAT THE WEIRD SCRIBBLE THAT HUMANS PUT ON THEM MUST BE PART OF WHAT WE CALL "A PAINTING" AND PUTS IT IN IT. SAME GOES WITH WATERMARKS. 100% YES. IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW SOMETHING HAS BEEN GENERATED, THROUGH AI OR THROUGH HUMAN HANDS, IF YOU PLAGIARIZE YOU PLAGIARIZE, AND YOU PAY THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF IT. SOMETHING INSPIRED BY SOMETHING ELSE IS FINE, BUT IF YOU PROMPT AN AI WORK TO REPRODUCE EXACTLY ANOTHER ARTWORK, AND THEN SELL IT, THAT'S JUST PLAGIARISM AND IT'S THE SAME AS TRYING TO SELL ANY COUNTERFEIT PRODUCT.

Share Pin Download More

dog example q&a

Origin Entry: AI Art

File type: jpg

Resolution: (1080px x 2768px)

File size: 576 KB

HOW IT FEEL TO LEARN FROM AN ACTUALLY GOOD TEACHER

Reid Southen @Rahll Apparently using the term "AI" in marketing makes people LESS likely to make a purchase. Just like crypto and NFTs before it, Al is now a dirty word that the average consumer wants to steer clear of. Congrats big tech, you did it again. news.wsu.edu/press-release/... Traduire le post Using the term 'artificial intelligence' in product descriptions reduces purchase intentions By Eric Hollenbeck, Carson College of Business fin

View All 329 Images

Load 115 Comments

Are Ya Winning, Great-Great Grandsons?

Mobs of spumed textile workers broke into their old workplaces and began smashing the new looms 2,000, commenced an attack, on Peter Jackson Are Ya Winning, Great-Great-Grandsons? Roope Rainisto @rainisto Replying to @proximasan Oh s---, their attack has already reached MidJourney training, check out how all my generations are now ruined! 3:02 AM Dec 15, 2022 44 Retweets 62 Quote Tweets 368 Likes

My take on a topic that's been blowing up the Internet lately

AI I look at a bunch of copyrighted art and draw my own art based on it, and I get branded as an art thief and boycotted HUMAN You look at a bunch of copyrighted art and draw your own art based on it, and you're a fan artist AL That doesn't seem fair

No matter your stance on AI art, please don't do this.

How about we ignore the word art and just say “This is a picture that was created by a thing that wasn’t a camera” | /r/memes

REDDIT Al art isn't art made with mematic No art is art because it's all subjective Al art is art

Newgrounds' ban on AI-generated art

$Al Art Al-generated art is not allowed in the Art Portal. This includes using tools such as Midjourney, Dall- E, and CrAlyon, in addition fractal generators and websites like ArtBreeder, where the user selects two images and they are combined into a new image via machine learning. There are cases where some use of Al is ok, for example if you are primarily showcasing your character art but use an Al-generated background. In these cases, please note any elements where Al was used so that it is clear to users and moderators. Tracing and coloring over Al-generated art is something best shared on your blog, as it is much like tracing over someone else's art. Making art from scratch that is inspired by an Al piece is ok. Here are two good examples: Maiden of Flames and Hermin. Both pieces reference the Al art they are based on while being original pieces in their own right. Bottom line: We want to keep the focus on art made by people and not have the Art Portal flooded with computer-generated art.$