AI have no rights. Your AI creations are right-less. They belong in the public domain. If not, they are properties of the peoples whose art you stole to make the AI.
this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
172 points (100.0% liked)
news
23421 readers
514 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That is a nonsense comparison on several levels and I think you know that. Either something is possible or it isn't, and if it is possible in some cases but not in others, there needs to be one or more variables that cause that to be the case. Your analysis, as presented, was clearly incomplete because countless people with aphantasia provide contrary testimony.
That's why I suggested that you might be misunderstanding what it's like for people who are -- as far as this topic is concerned -- NT. Art is hard and it requires an immense amount of knowledge and practice, and many (for this purpose) NT people live their lives bitterly thinking "I wish that I could put on the page what I see in my head, but I lack the talent to do so". Generally speaking, they are wrong, they just haven't put in the work like the artists have -- including the much greater work disabled artists have -- but it goes some way to demonstrate that even for the able it is a long and difficult and discouraging process to make things that you can imagine other people finding presentable, though you may never even if you are quite good. You spoke a few comments ago as though mental images are themselves a superpower that elide the need to actually learn how to draw when it's genuinely nothing more than an ability to generate mental rough sketches at will that are significantly less stable and consistent (and therefore less useful) than an actual sketch.
Your stick figure claim is false, that is all.