Link

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.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 80 points 2 years ago (1 child)

On the plus side, China also banned all AI content unless it is watermarked last year. So there isn't going to be a problem with people not being informed about what is and is not AI content. A significantly better position that prevents it from swamping human content because it's easy to filter out the AI works.

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/12/china-bans-ai-generated-media-without-watermarks/

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You are my favourite poster. Keep it up comrade.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I just repeat what I see whenever it's relevant! I'm glad to the original comrade that posted this here at some point in time, because I definitely originally saw it here.

    meow-hug I appreciate it anyway though!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    All those western educated libs China has running around inside its pipes need to get their asses purged, this shit is embarrassing

    Hopefully this is just Chinese liberals exerting what little power they have left and not a bellwether for some liberal resurgence on the mainland

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This is a direct consequence of the post-mao reform period.

    These liberal ideas are widespread throughout China, not part of some vocal minority. Liberal economics are taught in schools. The ruling class, as you mentioned, is taught in the western tradition. Regardless of the direction of the country or the intention of the CPC, people's day to day experience with the means of production is capitalistic, and they want to be successful in this domain. The media in China has largely taken a pro-US stance since the 90s and until very recently, most people thought it was a utopia (the majority still do), so people want to emulate that model.

    This is not something a purge can fix. It's a response to the development of the means of production.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    The ruling class, as you mentioned, is taught in the western tradition.

    What is this even based on? Taking the Politburo as a sample of the ruling class, only 2 of 24 people have had university education in the West. A total of 3 if you count university in HK as "western", and only 4 if you count the one other guy who got a degree in Russia.

    If you're basing "the Western tradition" on the idea that universities in China are teaching along those lines then we're gonna need one big-ass "citations needed".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago*
    [+] 42 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
    [–] 35 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Rough translation snippet from the WeChat post linked on Twitter:

    1. On the determination of intellectual achievement: "From the plaintiff's conception of the picture in question to the final selection of the picture in question, the entire process, the plaintiff has made a certain amount of intellectual input, such as designing the presentation of the characters, choosing the prompt's wording, arranging the order of the prompt's words, setting up the relevant parameters, and selecting which picture is in line with the user's expectations, etc.". The picture in question reflects the plaintiff's intellectual input, so the picture in question has the element of "intellectual achievement"."

    This is indeed a very rare China L.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    ussr-cry

    TIL if I make a program that just takes the Mona Lisa from a file and gives me back the Mona Lisa in another file with a bit of random noise attached that's now my IP as long as there was a text prompt where you have to write "Adult woman, oil painting, Renaissance, smile, landscape background, art, sunny."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 30 points 2 years ago

    Massive L, holy shit

  • source
  • [+] 28 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)
    load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 27 points 2 years ago

    With that and the Kissinger statement, China is on a cringe roll lately.

  • source
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Nah, AI is cool and at some point it will be good. There will soon come a time when any Chinese netizien could make their own marvel move and with a legal framework like this Hollywood will have no recourse

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Akshully any new technology that takes work away from artists is automatically bad. That's why nobody on Hexbear uses a camera and commissions portraits from local artists out of principle instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Yeah, using a camera is exactly the same as buzzword “AI” that’s scraped millions of images of art for data without the consent of the artist, to better replicate that human made art without having to pay a human, just to maximize profit. Exactly the same. Fuck off

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    I am the for regularization of AI, but I hate the "AI is stealing art" lie. What AI does is no different than a human looking at how other people draw to learn to draw like them. Nothing is being stolen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago

    The biggest difference is, when a human learns to draw, the new drawings that are created were created by a human artist and are expressing their human experience and perspective and emotions and ideas. There's an intelligent creator behind the new art that is being made.

    These so-called "AI" have no thoughts. They have no ideas or perspectives or ideas. There's no more originality here than a funhouse mirror.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (10 replies)
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 26 points 2 years ago (18 children)

    What is the difference between AI and MSPaint? Its all just digital tools to make images. Copyrights are dumb across the board but this is no more or less dumb.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Your take license has been revoked. You are no longer allowed to have takes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (22 children)

    I have almost complete aphantasia and dysgraphia. I can describe a picture but I could never draw it even on a computer. Despite the technology to overcome my Neuro divergency being at my fingertips I shouldn't own my creations because you don't like the tools I used?

    Ableist Classist Luddite. "Art is only for the few who can dedicate years of study to perfect their technique and fuck any technology that makes art more accessible. oh and digitally made music isn't music."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago* (8 children)

    Ableist Classist Luddite

    Wait just one sec comrade. Noone said you can't use it, but you really think you should be entitled to make money as an artist? You can literally get a job as an AI prompt writer/engineer. But what you want is to be recognized as an artist.

    Fine, then create a bunch of AI art, frame it, and take it to a gallery or to a market. Put it in a portfolio and display it on a website. Go network with other artists in your area and promote your work as art, see where it gets you. I'm genuinely curious.

    AI has the ability to write code, but very few software engineers have lost their jobs because of it. Why? Is it because AI code, like AI art, sucks ass?

    A lot of people here struggle with MH and some have overcome and found success. Maybe don't be so quick to label others as chauvinistic for pointing out that your idea is a priori nonsense that has little to no basis in reality. The fact remains that your struggles don't prevent you from picking up a paintbrush or a pencil or a mouse or whatever. Quadrapalegics still paint landscapes, Chuck Close is a world famous portrait artist who is face blind.

    AI art is trained on the art of others, full stop. Noone says you can't use it to create images for your own enjoyment. Maybe there is some value for creators in using AI? But the value is created for capitalists to suppress wages of creatives and force people into unemployment. Hollywood writers went on strike over this shit. People don't fucking like it and regardless of how you feel about that, art is subjective. So best of luck, get over yourself

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • load more comments (17 replies)
  • [–] 29 points 2 years ago (22 children)

    All of these AI tools are based on models trained on illegaly obtained samples from non-consenting artists. This is the key issue behind copyright. Its both the issue of failing to protect artists original copyright while granting copyright to art created through these tools.

    In a sane and honest economic system you'd hire a lot of these artists to create art specificaly for this, seek their consent and pay them according to the number of samples they have on the model, or respect their choice if they don't want their art sampled period. These are just naive suggestions I'm sure there are better proposals too.

    If you took all the steps above people would be a lot more open and positive about it. At the end of the day these tools are impossible to stop but it is the openly brazen lack of morality and justice of capitalism here that makes it obvious for people.

    Corporations cried about piracy since the rise of fucking VHS tape recorders 30 or 40 years ago. They lied and manipulated the narrative of digital piracy in the early 2000s, but now it is 2023, the internet is old now so it is suddenly not piracy when you scrape millions of pieces of art from the web.

    I think a complete no copyright stance would be the most realistic. If we assume you'll never be able to completely make sure someone didn't plagiarize or "reference" some prior art then at least don't make it worse by endorsing a tool built on entirely the premise of referencing and plagiarizing previous art.

    And this is also seperate as to whether these tools are good or bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • load more comments (22 replies)
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The issue here isn't individuals using AI to make art, you can make AI art to your hearts content, print it out, frame it. I don't care.

    Problem is a bunch of companies are trying to replace artists with AI. AI doesn't create original art, or collages art from other artists together. This means if, for example, Raytheon used AI to make an add, and a big chunk of that ad is from a painting I made, I can't object to a piece of my art being used to sell bombs.

    Even collage art made by actual humans doesn't get used in corporate advertising much for the same reason, if an artist sees their work being used in the college they may object to it. This is less a problem with independent artists. I actually make college art myself.

    And while I love showing it to people I'm very hesitant to use it in any context where I may directly profit from it cuz I wouldn't want to offend any of the people who made the original images. I doubt it would happen cuz generally I take material from advertising and change the context enough that the original creator probably wouldn't recognize it. Thing is I'm a human, I can understand that context and make a judgment call about it, and other humans can object if they disagree with my judgment about it and try and hold me accountable. An AI wouldn't be able to do that.

    I'd have less objections to AI art if it was always clearly watermarked (which China is apparently trying to do) and it was always clear who the person who generated it was, but right now AI is just pumping out tons of images with no way for artists to know if their images were used in it and who's profiting from it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (14 replies)
    [–] 25 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    machine learning is going to get so fucked up 3,5,10 years from now when it's all AI bubble body crap and there's nothing left to "learn" from

    also, BIC is a sub-section of the courts system there. It's not Xi (the president, but it's not a single-rule monarchical dictatorship ffs), or the CCP as a whole, which is a MASSIVE beast.

    It's like how USA has federal, state, family, work comp, veterans, etc. all different court systems. different from congress, executive, agencies, etc.

    here's to hoping the legislative NPC steps in and tells the BIC to fuck off, unfortunately i wouldn't hold my breath tho :(

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 22 points 2 years ago
    [–] 21 points 2 years ago

    Rare China L

    C'mon Xi you can do better than this.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago

    Alright mates let's see those indents make a rainbow, it's time for another struggle session.

  • source
  • [+] 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›