Comment

Comment on Valve dev counters calls to scrap Steam AI disclosures, says it's a "technology relying on cultural laundering, IP infringement, and slopification"

<- View Parent

AndyMFK@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

Strongly disagree. You’re basically saying smaller developers shouldn’t be punished for theft just because they can’t afford to pay artists.

Ai use, as the article outlined, is based on cultural laundering and IP theft.

So yeah, if you can’t make a game without stealing art, don’t make a game. And if you make a game with stolen art, you absolutely deserve to be review bombed.

And before you say ai generated art isn’t theft, the models are absolutely trained on stolen art

source

Sort:hotnew top

golden@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

theft

???

Please show me where the material goods were stolen. Piracy is not theft, taking ideas and concepts is not theft.

source
dreamkeeper@literature.cafe ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
There’s no law backing you up on any of this bs. You’re just holding indie devs back from competing with AAA devs, who have absolutely no qualms about using AI. And we all know you won’t stop buying AAA games no matter how much AI they use in development, so you’re also a hypocrite.

You’re playing right into the hands of all these tech corporations who force their own models down our throats. AI could be a tool for creatives to liberate themselves from big media but you’re playing right into their hands with this knee-jerk reactionary nonsense.

source
- warm@kbin.earth ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Respectfully, fuck right off.
  
  Indie games compete all the time, they make millions. Games are an artform. Any developers using AI are in it for a quick buck and people dont want to reward that versus traditional hardwork.
  
  Indies have been wildly successful for decades before AI has even existed, so dont suddenly pretend its a crutch they need now. And you are down right disrespecting any legitimate artists by defending AI use. It's disgusting.
  
  It's the AAA devs that are going to use AI to pump out more garbage, not the honest indie developers.
  
  source
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

the models are absolutely trained on stolen art

Downloading isn’t stealing, and in this case the law doesn’t agree with you either, nor does Steam; games developed with AI are legal. You’re entitled to your opinion about the ethics of it, and I think it’s fine if people want to only buy games without AI, but this is an incredibly petty way to rationalize organized harassment against people with no ill intent trying to realize their dreams. The only reason anyone goes after them is because they are softer targets than any of the billionaires and corporations doing actually questionable things with the technology.

source
- Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  
  Downloading isn’t stealing
  
  Plagiarism is.
  
  source
- AndyMFK@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Downloading isn’t stealing??? Are you delusional? It is in this case. Just because the law doesn’t recognise it is irrelevant, I’m not talking about legality, I’m talking about the ethics of ripping off small, underpaid artists.
  
  Download a game, or a movie, or an album without the required license. That’s piracy.
  
  If I download a Disney movie, and use clips of it in my game, how do you think a court case would go?
  
  Or if I download idk, a Taylor Swift album and use that in my game without a license, do you think the law would agree with me or Taylor Swift?
  
  And my only excuse is “I couldn’t afford to make my own music so I used yours”?
  
  Using ai is no different. You’re taking someone else’s work, not paying for it, and using it in your training model without permission.
  
  Just because they may have no ill intent is irrelevant, it only speaks to their ignorance on the matter.
  
  “I’m sorry officer I didn’t mean to speed, I had no ill intent”. Ok, you’re still getting a ticket. Ignorance is no excuse.
  
  source
  - golden@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    dbzer0 users out here defending the capitalist system 😎
    
    source
  - chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    I’m talking about the ethics
    
    You’re talking about your supposed right to enforce your idea of ethics on people who don’t agree with you, in a situation where there is no universal consensus, there is no law backing you up, and all supposed harms are abstract, indirect, and essentially a dispute about market competition.
    
    Just because they may have no ill intent is irrelevant, it only speaks to their ignorance on the matter.
    
    “I’m sorry officer I didn’t mean to speed, I had no ill intent”. Ok, you’re still getting a ticket. Ignorance is no excuse.
    
    It matters because it’s one clear reason why the people harassing them are assholes. Pretty different from a situation where someone has violated an established law very closely linked to putting people at risk of direct physical harm and that law is being enforced.
    
    source
    agent_nycto@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    You’re talking about your supposed right to enforce your idea of ethics on people who don’t agree with you, in a situation where there is no universal consensus, there is no law backing you up…
    
    Uh yeah man there’s some people who are actually ok with having the brain worms inserted into other people’s ears? Sure it kills them and it’s being used for genocide but there’s no law against brain worms and since there’s like, a handful of people ok with it and it’s not 100% universally condoned ethically and it’s not illegal everywhere then how could you possibly be so mean to impose your morality on other people?!
    
    That’s what you sound like.
    
    “Oh hey billionaires are making Earth destroying computers that are killing jobs and stealing art and music and saying humans are better off without doing the one thing that we’ve always regarded as fundamental for humanity, but some idiots like instant gratification so they are ok with it, so no one should be saying anything bad about the earth destroying theft machines”
    
    source
    thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    You’re talking about your supposed right to enforce your idea of ethics on people who don’t agree with you, in a situation where there is no universal consensus, there is no law backing you up, and all supposed harms are abstract, indirect, and essentially a dispute about market competition.
    
    “illegal = unethical” is a fascist take
    
    The harms are real, but it’s also about control over your creations that you own, would you want your creations stolen, copied, mashed up with other stolen creations and the occational public domain thing, and extruded as slop?
    
    Or a better question, do you want the right for your creations not to be used like this? Surely it would be good if you could specify AI policies in licenses and they were legally enforceable?
    
    source
    -> View More Comments