• @sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    41 year ago

    Ok that’s entirely disingenuous. You can make an AI model open source where you get real permission from artists instead of taking their work without permission and using it to replace them.

    It’s entirely possible. Will the large orgs have more resources to collect art? No shit, yeah, and they’ll have better PCs to train on too. No matter what, allowed to take from hard working small artists while attempting to make them irrelevant or not, the big corps will always have a heads up here.

    Unless, like so many other projects, an extremely complicated system benefits from collaborative work inside an open environment. Shocking, I know, working on merit over money.

    You don’t want a conversation though you just want “epic dunks”

    • @lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      The amount of training data needed for a model is so huge that you’d have to use only artwork that was preemptively licensed for that purpose. Individually asking artists for permission to use their work would be far too expensive even if they all agreed to let you use their work for free.

      • @BURN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        And why is that a problem?

        Artists should have control over their work. It’s not my problem that a big company vs a small company is stealing my work, I don’t want either of them to.

        I no longer post anything online that I create cause I’d rather nobody see it than it be stolen for AI training.

      • @sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        That is correct, though there could be campaigns to collect art otherwise. There are plenty of artists in the open source world who could do it, and asking individuals to signal boost these calls to action can get more push. Once more, no matter what, big corps will always have more monitary resources. The power of open source is volunteer manpower and passion. Even if these weren’t the case, the moral argument still stands in using a persons work to replace them without permission.

        Regardless of that even, what this will do is cause stagnation in the art field if not protected. Nobodies going to share their art, their method, or their ideas freely in a world where doing so allows a massive corp to take it freely without permission, thus replacing them. This kills ideas of open distribution of art and art information. It will become hidden, and new ideas, new art, will not be available to view.

        Allowing people to take without permission will only ever hurt the small artists. Disney will always be able to just “take” any art they make.

        Also, you’re not entirely correct on that. Models made for specific purposes don’t actually need the absurd amount generalist models need. However in the context of current expectations yeah, you’re right on quantity.