A federal judge rejected arguments from Stability AI, Midjourney and DeviantArt that the suit is intended to suppress its free speech.

A federal judge rejected arguments from Stability AI, Midjourney and DeviantArt that the suit is intended to suppress its free speech.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.mlEnglish
    0·
    9 months ago

    Not parent, but because of the following reasons:

    • Stability AI for images, and many others like Llama for chatbots are open source and can run on commodity hardware
    • AI doesn’t replace skills, it’s only a tool to enhance them: As a coder, I can use Stability AI to make cool art, but my AI generated work isn’t nearly as cool as when an artist uses AI tools
    • You can’t really fight it, so you may as well embrace it
    • Alto@kbin.social
      0·
      9 months ago

      I think the issue with point 2 is that most of the people doing the work know that, but the people making decisions tend to not. We’ve seen time and time again that companies will absolutely ruin their future prospects for short terms profits. This isn’t going to be an exception, and a lot of people that the companies can’t actually afford to lose are going to get laid off.

    • tabular@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      If an AI tool helps your output by doing something intelligent for you that “enhances” the work but you didn’t do the part the AI did - the AI doing something intelligent was a substitute for you doing something intelligent.

      In the minimal a single skill loss is not significant to you producing output, but in the maximal none of your human skill is needed. AI will think of better prompts than you, or artists, to make cool art.