• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -49 months ago

    L take, AI is not a person and doesn’t have the right to learn like a person. It is a tool and it can be used to replicate others art.

    • @Grumpy
      link
      English
      69 months ago

      What gives a human right to learn off of another person without credit? There is no such inherent right.

      Even if such a right existed, I as a person who can make AI training, would then have the right to create a tool to assist me in learning, because I’m a person with same rights as anyone else. If it’s just a tool, which it is, then it is not the AI which has the right to learn, I have the right to learn, which I used to make the tool.

      I can use photoshop to replicate art a lot more easily than with AI. None of us are going around saying Photoshop is wrong. (Though we did say that before) The AI won’t know any specific art unless it’s an extremely repeated pattern like “mona lisa”. It literally do not have the capacity to contain other people’s art, and therefore it cannot replicate others art. I have already proven that mathematically.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        19 months ago

        Yep, these ppl act like they get to choose who or what ingest their product when they make it available willingly on the internet…oftentimes for free.

        This whole argument falls on its face once u realize they don’t want AI to stop…they just want a cut.

    • Echo Dot
      link
      fedilink
      English
      09 months ago

      That doesn’t make it bad.

      It’s a tool that can be used to replicate other art except it doesn’t replicate art does it.

      It creates works based on other works which is exactly what humans do whether or not it’s sapient is irrelevant. My work isn’t valuable because it’s copyrightable. On a sociopath things like that