Well, I guess we'll see how that argument plays in court. I don't see how it follows, myself.
Comment on This new data poisoning tool lets artists fight back against generative AI
AnonTwo@kbin.social 11 months agoThe general argument legally is that the AI has no exact memory of the copyrighted material.
But if that's the case, then these pixels shouldn't need be patched. Because it wouldn't remember the material that spawned them.
Is just the argument I assume would be used.
FaceDeer@kbin.social 11 months ago
KeenFlame@feddit.nu 11 months ago
What is “patching pixels” and who would do it?
AnonTwo@kbin.social 11 months ago
Is that not answered in the original article?
Maven@lemmy.sdf.org 11 months ago
It’s like training an artist who’s never seen a banana or a fire hydrant, by passing them pictures of fire hydrants labelled “this is a banana”. When you ask for a banana, you’ll get a fire hydrant. Correcting that mistake doesn’t mean “undoing pixels”, it means teaching the AI what bananas and fire hydrants are.