OpenAI's latest image-generation update has taken social media by storm, as users are flooding X, Instagram, and Reddit with Studio Ghibli-style images
Shouldn’t’t need it. Instead I say the push should be that any AI trained on public resources must remain public and any derivative of that model also must remain publicly available.
I don’t care about copyrights. I care about content.
Every paid artist could disappear. Content will still be created. Probably better content and products then anything created under any copyright and IP as is now.
Absolutely. The Internet pre monetization was way better than anything today. It was funnier. It was more original. It lacked all the dumb attention whores today who only exist to profit like Andrew Tate, Rogan, H3, Jordan Peterson
I agree with this, but I don’t think we’ll ever be able to have that again. AI slop is drowning out all the genuine content regardless of monetization.
What’s the incentive to put hours of effort into something if nobody will ever see it because every hour another 1000 AI versions were generated and they’re all “close enough” to fool someone not paying attention?
If we didn’t have copyright then people wouldn’t be able to justify putting effort into creating content because they wouldn’t be guaranteed financial compensation for the time and effort they put in.
Everything costs money, If I’m writing a novel I still have to pay the bills I still have to buy groceries I still have to pay for water and electricity I need to be compensated for my time.
I’m not standing in your path of success, fiscal reality is. If you want your utopia future by all means, but you need to actually come up with a solution.
Making naive comments online isn’t a stance, it’s just declaring to the world you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I know what I want. I don’t have to care that you think you should stand in the way of people creating new things. If they’re not copying your work then it’s not a problem. If they buy your book and use it to train an AI that is ethically fine. I don’t support the growth of intellectual property laws.
If we didn’t have copyright then people wouldn’t be able to justify putting effort into creating content because they wouldn’t be guaranteed financial compensation for the time and effort they put in.
The irony of saying this on Lemmy. Lemmy is piece of software developed and distributed for free to people who host it for free. If somebody truly wants to make something they will create it even without profit incentive.
That’s not really relevant to the discussion. The number of users doesn’t matter. The point is that people will still create things even if there’s no money in doing it.
Jellyfin is another example of something I use every day that is completely developed for free. The is no difference whether 100 people or 100 million people use it. It exists because the people who built it want it to exist.
Hopefully. It makes cool pictures.
I said without, I wouldn’t believe they got his approval…
Shouldn’t’t need it. Instead I say the push should be that any AI trained on public resources must remain public and any derivative of that model also must remain publicly available.
Yes I agree. But copyrighted material isn’t a public resource.
I don’t care about copyrights. I care about content.
Every paid artist could disappear. Content will still be created. Probably better content and products then anything created under any copyright and IP as is now.
Better content?
Lol
Lmao even.
Absolutely. The Internet pre monetization was way better than anything today. It was funnier. It was more original. It lacked all the dumb attention whores today who only exist to profit like Andrew Tate, Rogan, H3, Jordan Peterson
I agree with this, but I don’t think we’ll ever be able to have that again. AI slop is drowning out all the genuine content regardless of monetization. What’s the incentive to put hours of effort into something if nobody will ever see it because every hour another 1000 AI versions were generated and they’re all “close enough” to fool someone not paying attention?
If we didn’t have copyright then people wouldn’t be able to justify putting effort into creating content because they wouldn’t be guaranteed financial compensation for the time and effort they put in.
Everything costs money, If I’m writing a novel I still have to pay the bills I still have to buy groceries I still have to pay for water and electricity I need to be compensated for my time.
I have needs and wants as well. I hope you get paid well. But when you stand in the path of something I think to be progress then we conflict.
I’m not standing in your path of success, fiscal reality is. If you want your utopia future by all means, but you need to actually come up with a solution.
Making naive comments online isn’t a stance, it’s just declaring to the world you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I know what I want. I don’t have to care that you think you should stand in the way of people creating new things. If they’re not copying your work then it’s not a problem. If they buy your book and use it to train an AI that is ethically fine. I don’t support the growth of intellectual property laws.
The irony of saying this on Lemmy. Lemmy is piece of software developed and distributed for free to people who host it for free. If somebody truly wants to make something they will create it even without profit incentive.
Scale Lemmy to the size of Reddit and we’ll see if good Samaritans are still willing to host it for free.
That’s not really relevant to the discussion. The number of users doesn’t matter. The point is that people will still create things even if there’s no money in doing it.
Jellyfin is another example of something I use every day that is completely developed for free. The is no difference whether 100 people or 100 million people use it. It exists because the people who built it want it to exist.
Well, that’s one take I guess… Not a good one, but one none the less…