I found this thought funny. A few years ago everyone was all learn to code so you don’t lose your job! Now there wont be any programming jobs in 10 years. But we will need a lot of manual labor still.

  • mindbleach
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 days ago

    Not even piracy is theft, and this is not piracy. Training is transformative use. A four-gig model should be worse at reproducing the Mona Lisa than a 40 KB JPEG. Anything less famous should have the accuracy of oral tradition.

    This is a whole new kind of software, more complex than anything we know how to do any other way, and it performs witchcraft. You, personally, expect it to replace anything I could ever write. It could do that even if we erased all existing models and started from public-domain custom-made artisanally-sourced data. The delay would be minor and pointless. It doesn’t even work yet, and the rich fuckers are going, stuff’s getting easier, let’s make life harder.

    Technology is not the problem.

    • pelespirit
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      Technology is not the problem.

      You’re right, it’s technology that’s been programmed to steal people’s art that’s the problem. Stop it.

      • mindbleach
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        Doing what you expect would not fix what you’re complaining about.

        Say we tossed all this out, and only trained on a tiny set of varied images, made specifically for this training. We create a bespoke from-scratch model that’s free and clear of any concerns for authorship, copyright, permission, or content.

        That model could still copy any artist’s style. However close or abstract the approximation, it’s only a vector in some n-dimensional space. Some guy uses thick lines, purple shadows, extreme perspectives? Then so long as the new model has concepts of line width, shadow tint, and foreshortening, all you gotta do is probe for how it classifies that guy’s work, versus anyone else’s.

        This is how models published a year ago can be made to reproduce anime characters who were announced yesterday. If you can describe Hatsune Miku in terms of her distinguishing features then any worthwhile model will satisfy those labels.

        • pelespirit
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 days ago

          Then pay the artists who the models stole the style from. You can’t copy a style unless the artist agrees. Also, all artist’s work used as a source must be credited.

          • mindbleach
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            15 days ago

            … if I draw in another artist’s style, using my human hands, do I owe them money?

            Legally speaking, do I even owe them credit?

            • pelespirit
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              15 days ago

              Yes, you do. It’s fuzzy about how much you can do it and cross the line, but it’s illegal. If you use my art to create someone’s other art, then get permission and pay me. Just like in the movies, give credit where credit is due.

              • mindbleach
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                15 days ago

                “Using your art” is not in any sense the same thing as “drawing in your style.”

                You can’t keep equivocating between wholesale copy-pasting and… anything else.

                And again: a character created yesterday can still be recreated with existing models. That art plainly was not used for the model - it did not exist, yet.