Comment on US rejects AI copyright for famous state fair-winning Midjourney art

• xkforce@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I dont think AI is equivalent. It can create content without you being involved and in massive quantities. It is very much capable of decimating the workforce.

  You have to remember that you exist in a capitalist system that would love very much to replace you with cheaper labor if it could and there is no human that can possibly work for cheaper than an appropriately trained AI.

  The only way that an artist would have a chance to survive is either through maintaining the craft via the novelty of it. I.e hand drawn/painted etc. (Which would be progresssively easier to fake) Or to become one of the people that make prompts and dont actually generate the content themselves. And the latter group of people is going to shrink over time as AI gets better at making content with little input. So any precedent set now is going to cause issues down the line when the tide shifts in AI’s favor.

  source

  • hardware26@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I agree that AI can decimate workforce. My point is, other tools did that already and this is not unique to AI. Imagine electronic chip design. Transistor was invented in 40s and it was a giant tube. Today we have chips with billions of transistors. Initially people were designing circuits on transistor level, then register transfer level languages got invented and added a layer of abstraction. Today we even have high level synthesis languages which converts C to a gatelist. And consider the backend, this gate list is routed into physical transistors in a way that timing is met, clocks are distributed in balance, signal and power integrity are preserved, heat is removed etc. Considering there are billions of transistors and no single unique way of connecting them, tool gets creative and comes with a solution among virtually infinite possibilities which satisfy your specification. You have to tell the tool what you need, and give some guidance occasionally, but what it does is incredible, creative, and wouldn’t be possible if you gathered all engineers in the world and make them focus on a single complex chip without tools’ help. So they have been taking engineers’ jobs for decades, but what happened so far is that industry grew together with automation. If we reach the limits of demand, or physical limitations of technology, or people cannot adapt to the development of the tools fast enough by updating their job description and skillset, then decimation of the workforce happens. But this isn’t unique to AI.

    I am not against regulating AI, I am just saying what I think will happen. Offloading all work to AI and getting UBI would be nice, but I don’t see that happening in near future.

    source
  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I don’t see the problem with getting replaced by AI or computers.

    The goal should be that nobody has to work anymore. And we are free to follow our passions, instead of grinding our way through life in order to survive.

    I know the idea doesn’t go hand in hand with Capitalism, but most things don’t so that isn’t unusual.

    source
• Natanael@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  That’s already the case, but also it has to be substantially guided by a human because copyright only protects human expression and elements beyond what the human intentionally expressed are not protected. (Of course studios won’t generally admit how much human involvement there really were)

  source