this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
59 points (95.4% liked)

Technology

59440 readers
5532 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
59
A New Contract for Artists in the Age of Generative AI (techpolicy.press)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
4 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A New Contract for Artists in the Age of Generative AI::A new framework will enable greater control over the use of artists’ data when artists share their work online, says Eryk Salvaggio.

top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

How is an AI trained on an artists painting, any different from a person who looked at that painting in art school? It’s not like the AI contains all of its training data; you can prove that from the file sizes.

I’m all for what the article advocates, but it’s kind of like publishing a book and saying “you have a license to read this, but not to learn anything from it”

I’m afraid this is going to turn out like “a new contract for typewriter repairmen in the age of laptop computers”

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Because people iterate and machine learning algorithms only copy

there is no new information, it's just regurgitating bits and pieces of what it was fed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So its less about induvidual cases and more about the overall result, as far as I can tell there are several major obstacles and we need to figure out some kind of solution that addresses all of them.

  • AI can only remix, it can remix some pretty incredible things but at the end of the day you still need fresh input from human artists to stop it from getting stagnant so we need to incentivize that somehow.
  • AI can (deliberately or accidentally) create near identical copies of existing works, how similar is too similar before thats considered copyright infringement.
  • Can AI art be copyrighted? if yes then what stops someone putting a huge server farm to the task of generating every possible distinct image within some fairly common categories and subsiquently patent trolling basically everyone.
  • If AI art can't be copyrighted whats the ratio of human to AI art before it becomes uncopyrightable, can I effectively nullify someone elses legitimate copyright by creating a similar but automatically non-copyright AI derived duplicate.

I'm sure more obstacles can be forseen depending on how pedantic you want to get, and the problem with people is that a certain subsection of the population will absoloutely make a whole career of being pedantic as hell to the detriment of everybody else.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I don’t think we can compare human learning to AI one.

Tho u are in a way right. Those ppl don’t protest the AI, they protest progress.