Oh hell yeah
-
This post did not contain any content.
Copyright lawsuit incoming
-
It’s actually working, many people around me that were enthusiastic about AI are now pissed off by it thanks to all that shit.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]So if bots flood db0 with terrible AI generated spam, then the db0 admins will stop being weird about AI?
... I'm not asking for any particular reason
-
Fucking hell
-
So if bots flood db0 with terrible AI generated spam, then the db0 admins will stop being weird about AI?
... I'm not asking for any particular reason
spam is spam. We'll deal with it like any other spam.
-
spam is spam. We'll deal with it like any other spam.
I think all AI art is spam
-
I am only critical that those models are in the hand of corporations who try to profit from it. Copyrights are mainly a tool to be wielded by the powerful: see Sony trying to disconnect ISP accounts en masse or media giants suing people into oblivion, Nintendo fucking over their fanbase again and again and so on.
The datasets should belong to an UN organisation like UNESCO, corporations/NGOs/people should be able to licence them to build their models (ev. with "community models" provided free for personal use), and the licence fees should be used to subsidize culture. This plus an UBI would make sure that artists don't have to starve, corporations can use them to try to make a profit, and everyone else can use them to create for their own or their communities use. Artists that don't want to go into the datasets have that right too, but also won't have access to that financial pool (this shouldn't be the only pool).
Fuck copyrights.
Under capitalism, copyrights are a necessary tool for people to get paid for their labour in some cases. That's not the most common usecase for copyrights, but a needed one until we get a better system. Fuck copyrights being used for corporate greed though. Somehow, more people are against the former than the latter, which is super wrong. But it's not a reason to be against the former in addition to being against the latter.
-
Aren't they doing this already? Seriously have any of you been on facebook. It's full of that crap.
Exactly! The 'death' of facebook has in no way seemed to impact its influence on everything. I still find places that use a facebook page as their company website. The marketplace is inescapable if you want to buy or sell something used.
All this idea would do is establish a very well known area for AI to be used in... and it would serve the same function as a reservoir of infection for pathogens.
-
Exactly! The 'death' of facebook has in no way seemed to impact its influence on everything. I still find places that use a facebook page as their company website. The marketplace is inescapable if you want to buy or sell something used.
All this idea would do is establish a very well known area for AI to be used in... and it would serve the same function as a reservoir of infection for pathogens.
Or even local municipalities publishing important adivice.
/hey did you know that they have to cut the water supply to work on these leaking pipes?
/no
/why not we put it on facebook
/...No i don't have facebook, O just wish people who used it understood this little fact of life. But no. They rely on facebook for local communication, essentially cutting out anyone else.
-
Ok? And what does this have to do with anything I wrote?
Edit: Oh, I get it. You misread the first paragraph and completely ignored the second which made you completely miss the point of my comment.
I'm not saying that you can't specialize AI to sound like a specific actor. I'm saying that you can't train a new AI model using only recordings of a single actor.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]You can record a few seconds of dialogue and get convincing results. I’m sure at a professional level, you could do it with a few minutes at most.
(Side note, I don’t endorse or recommend the site I linked to. Only using it to demonstrate the point. I don’t recommend you surrender the sound of your voice to these guys.)
-
Or even local municipalities publishing important adivice.
/hey did you know that they have to cut the water supply to work on these leaking pipes?
/no
/why not we put it on facebook
/...No i don't have facebook, O just wish people who used it understood this little fact of life. But no. They rely on facebook for local communication, essentially cutting out anyone else.
That one freaking kills me. I can only hope that the movement of some places onto mastodon might help be a gentle push and a guide that can be pointed to for other places to follow.
-
I am only critical that those models are in the hand of corporations who try to profit from it. Copyrights are mainly a tool to be wielded by the powerful: see Sony trying to disconnect ISP accounts en masse or media giants suing people into oblivion, Nintendo fucking over their fanbase again and again and so on.
The datasets should belong to an UN organisation like UNESCO, corporations/NGOs/people should be able to licence them to build their models (ev. with "community models" provided free for personal use), and the licence fees should be used to subsidize culture. This plus an UBI would make sure that artists don't have to starve, corporations can use them to try to make a profit, and everyone else can use them to create for their own or their communities use. Artists that don't want to go into the datasets have that right too, but also won't have access to that financial pool (this shouldn't be the only pool).
Fuck copyrights.
If we just got rid of copyright, we would just see Disney flipping other people's work without credit, just like how genAI grifters try to use it currently.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
I dont know why it upsets people. Maybe accept that it exists in the world and it only mimics real human creativity.
If there was a fish that could mimic and recreate human art would you be mad at the fish?
-
I remember finding it funny and endearing when I first watched it. And then it just... never... stopped...
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I think that was every normal person's experience with minions. They were funny as side characters in the film, but then the sequels and spinoffs leaned too heavily into them and the memes started and everyone with 2 braincells to rub together said "fuck this" and ignored the minion scurge to fester
-
Under capitalism, copyrights are a necessary tool for people to get paid for their labour in some cases. That's not the most common usecase for copyrights, but a needed one until we get a better system. Fuck copyrights being used for corporate greed though. Somehow, more people are against the former than the latter, which is super wrong. But it's not a reason to be against the former in addition to being against the latter.
The fastest fix is a very short copyright window, say 5-10 years. Given the fact that every movie release makes back it's entire production budget in 1 week or is immediately deemed a flop, 5-10 years is plenty of time to mine an IP for boatloads of cash, plus once anyone can make a star wars movie or book or whatever, the real value shifts instead to the brand that produces it. New brands can make a name for themselves respinnong "old" IPs and making far better content than the original studio would've been willing to risk, and big brands can focus more on how important it is to view the only official versions of a given IP based on their branding.
-
The fastest fix is a very short copyright window, say 5-10 years. Given the fact that every movie release makes back it's entire production budget in 1 week or is immediately deemed a flop, 5-10 years is plenty of time to mine an IP for boatloads of cash, plus once anyone can make a star wars movie or book or whatever, the real value shifts instead to the brand that produces it. New brands can make a name for themselves respinnong "old" IPs and making far better content than the original studio would've been willing to risk, and big brands can focus more on how important it is to view the only official versions of a given IP based on their branding.
That'd also harm big corporations less than small, independent artists who don't get paid as much per use of their artwork.
-
Gabe Omaey
Gabe Omaey
-
I dont know why it upsets people. Maybe accept that it exists in the world and it only mimics real human creativity.
If there was a fish that could mimic and recreate human art would you be mad at the fish?
It's a plagarism machine that is being used to put actual artists out of work
-
It's a plagarism machine that is being used to put actual artists out of work
Plagiarism isn't real except for capitalism and the machine of capitalist innovation has been eating jobs for as long as science has existed. If this is the reason someone is upset by AI, then I would ask why they were not mad at all the jobs that came before that had been consumed.
-
It's a plagarism machine that is being used to put actual artists out of work
Yeah, that's true. Humans are born knowing nothing, learn from other humans, and are then capable of making something new. Like standing on the shoulders of giants. I wonder if ML/AI is capable of that yet, or does it purely regurgitate others' work.
-
I like it.
It's the "Use your kid's slang to make them realize it's garbage" reverse card.
Totally works. When I started referring to things as "skibidi" it was suddenly dropped from my kids' lexicon.
