You’ve made this “least interesting average of other images” assertion multiple times, but that’s not a fact that you’ve sourced - it’s just a summary of your personal misperception of how the tech works. Where did you even get this idea?
You’ve made this “least interesting average of other images” assertion multiple times, but that’s not a fact that you’ve sourced - it’s just a summary of your personal misperception of how the tech works. Where did you even get this idea?
You’re not making an actual argument here. You’re just repeating the same things as if they’re self-evident. Why does the difference between scraping and “inspiration” matter to the question of ethics? If I set out to imitate someone else’s style, why does it matter if I do that with my hand or with a computer? And if…
That seems to be your concern - I, for one, have no concerns about AI art. I think it will enable massive, transformative works that we couldn’t possibly produce before because they’d simply be too expensive. I can’t wait to see what people can make with diffusion models in ten years.
Literally nobody “makes something on their own.” Every artist is dependent on the full body of art they trained their eye on, just as diffusion models are.
Tell me you don’t understand copyright law without saying you don’t understand copyright law.
Don’t post this reasonable, fact-based info too many places - the anti-AI crowd are NOT fans of learning how diffusion models actually work.
“If you cut out the entry level position of an industry that requires skilled labor you kill the industry.”
“Is it generic, bland and otherwise unremarkable?”
So you feel the same way about all collage art? You rail against collage artists online, and talk at length about how they’re destroying the art business, right?
Sure it is, buddy. Even though the same has been said about every new genre of art or music in modern history, this one, this time, will definitely be different. Well-analyzed.
People said this about punk, too - so simple, anyone can thrash a guitar badly, punk will never create anything deep or meaningful.
This is what’s so deranged about so many anti-AI arguments: at some point, you abandon all pretense of logic or honesty. Lensa doesn’t “steal” your selfies - you pay them for the service of voluntarily uploading your selfies for it train on and produce an output.
Stop viewing the world as all or nothing, maybe? The options are not between “human artists only, ban AI” and “AI replaces all human artists.” AI will replace some human tasks, but not all. Exactly like Photoshop, Illustrator, and InDesign did: literally all of them put people out of work, but for some reason none of…
How do we have a “dead music industry”? I find more great new music in a month now than I did in a year twenty years ago. There’s such a huge glut of great, professional music right now that it’s impossible to keep up.
Oh, I’m on board. I’m not advocating boycotting any content here - just pointing out the flaw in the strategy of commenting negatively.
You’re just voting for more by commenting. If you want it to end, you have to stop clicking. And DEFINITELY stop commenting.
Yeah... the vast majority of the things Trump “did” either never actually happened (since most executive orders are just pretty pieces of paper) or were stopped by the courts.
You don’t need to know every step, but you ought to have some idea if there’s even anything Biden CAN do under US law. Musk is actively breaking laws in Europe - can you say the same for the US? And if so, which laws?
“The average person has ZERO interest in how their car runs and drives”
My suggestion would be that, instead of patronizingly telling other people what they should or should not comment on, you instead post informative comments with actual details to support your point. Since you didn’t do any of that, you come across as a douchebag animated by misogyny. Be better.