Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

supermegaampharos t1_iza8177 wrote

Reply to comment by GeneralZain in What do you think of all the recent very vocal detractors of AI generated art? by razorbeamz

I agree with your general point, for the record.

But:

>It’s absolutely a problem that these programs are trained using material the developers don’t have permission to use.

This part I mentioned earlier is still valid.

Just because something is posted on the Internet doesn't mean you have permission to use it. These AIs are using artist's work in ways the developers don't have permission to and that's a fair complaint.

It's one thing when somebody uses somebody else's artwork for personal use, and often artists say that's fine, but it's something else entirely when a for-profit company uses somebody else's artwork to train an AI for their commercial product.

Is that an issue with our economic systems? Absolutely. Are some artists taking their anger out on the wrong people and issues? Absolutely. Does that make them backwards luddites? No, they still have legitimate grievances.

3

heavy_metal t1_izasj70 wrote

>use it

in copyright parlance that means making money from a direct copy. training an AI is akin to an art student going to a gallery, then creating art in a similar style. Not the same as photographing art, then trying to sell photos of it.

5