Technology

59622 readers

3424 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

377

Redditors Vent and Complain When People Mock Their "AI Art" (futurism.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

253 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Setting aside the usual arguments on the anti- and pro-AI art debate and the nature of creativity itself, perhaps the negative reaction that the Redditor encountered is part of a sea change in opinion among many people that think corporate AI platforms are exploitive and extractive in nature because their datasets rely on copyrighted material without the original artists' permission. And that's without getting into AI's negative drag on the environment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (3 children)

The analogy doesn't work. The difference is that this "printing press" is stealing massive amounts of creative work and calling it its own, and using massive amounts of energy to do so.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I say in every art form you'll find more copies than originals. Literature, cinema, paintings, photography, music... Everybody who's creative is copying and reusing and recombining and sampling and synthesizing ideas.

And that's true also for computer generated art.

The difference is that it's hardly possible to claim ownership for a picture or a video that was automatically generated by algorithms.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You talking about humans or AI?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm talking about AI. However, the statement I made wasn't very well informed. Others have shared with me how the printing press did indeed give rise to fears about piracy, and create entirely new discussions & problems related to intellectual property.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Kinda off topic, but I love Lemmy. How many more people actually think about what they say here. Refreshing compared to a lot of other social media. Anyway thanks for listening to others point of views.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

It's also why I love it here. Actual discourse without (much) shouting mindlessly at each other.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I mean, apart from the "using massive amounts of energy" part, that is exactly what people said about the printing press.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

From what I understood, the fears surrounding the printing press (as well as other advancements throughout history related to information, text, & writing) were more about people being overloaded with information both false and/or true, or people becoming less studious/disciplined. (Link as an example)

https://slate.com/technology/2010/02/a-history-of-media-technology-scares-from-the-printing-press-to-facebook.html

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Further to "stealing massive amounts of creative work and calling it its own," this is what was said about the printing press:

https://press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/401189.html (see halfway down)

https://www.vox.com/2015/6/1/8697947/elizabethan-book-pirates

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Thanks for sharing, those are indeed sources that I've never encountered before.