If you need to use AI, be aware that there are MANY free models and training options.
OpenAI's move to allow generating "Ghibly stlye" images isn't just a cute PR stunt. It is an expression of dominance and the will to reject and refuse democratic values. It is a display of power
Submitted 1 year ago by juergen@feddit.org to technology@lemmy.world
https://tante.cc/2025/03/28/vulgar-display-of-power/
Comments
arc@lemm.ee 1 year ago
cheeseburger@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
I wonder how Nintendo will react when it’s their turn 😆
Orisis@lemm.ee 1 year ago
We already have AI yet people are still illiterate and misspell words in the title. Really makes you think
vane@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Is this fashion comeback ? Style transfer was popular 10 years ago.
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 year ago
How dare they not respect intellectual property 😢😢😭😭😭😭
LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Seriously? With everything going on this is what people want to rage about? How disconnected do you have to be?
MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Ugh, why are they quoting that blowhard David Gerard
glitchdx@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I say this as someone who frequently uses generative ai, and actively chooses to pay for the service.
Fuck openai.
This company has utterly failed to fulfill their mission statement, and they will be unable to make right by humanity until ALL software they have created is available to the public as FOSS (free and open source software). Openai claimed that this is exactly what they were going to do, and then they just didn’t. So fuckem.
silverlose@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Have you heard of ollama? You can run deepseek and stuff locally super easy. I know it’s not a complete replacement, but it feels nice to use an LLM guilt free. I’ve compared the 14b distilled model from deepseek vs the paid version of ChatGPT and it made me cancel my account.
glitchdx@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I would prefer to run my ais locally, but my brain glazes over if I see github. I found a a program called “gpt4all”, but it’s very limited in what models it can run, and what I could get just wasn’t as good for my use case as openai’s 4o model. Also, being able to generate images in the same conversation as text work is a feature that I’m fairly certain no other ai model can do (yet).
tupalos@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What do you use to run it locally? If there was something that could use speech to text reliably to be able to use a open source option, I consider switching.
TheFriar@lemm.ee 1 year ago
If you don’t mind my asking, how do you not have a moral objection to using AI? With everything we know about it, the theft, the benefit to the technocrats, the environmental toll, I could not bring myself to wave away those issues. Not to mention the power imbalance of this tech being controlled by the ruling class, looking to eliminate people’s livelihoods for the sake of profit. What do you use it for? I feel like we should be boycotting them en masse.
glitchdx@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I pick my battles.
If I took a hard stance of not engaging with any business that did things I morally object to, I’d be forced to be a self-sufficient hermit in the woods.
interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 year ago
The problem is ownership, financialisation, blitzscaling, growth hacking, betting against us with our pension funds and buying our government with the profits.
Disown all intellectual property, destroy enclosers of the common.
This isn’t an AI problem, it is just another facet of our vampiric elites perpetually disempowering us, marginalising us. This is the all-encompassing everything-problem.
This will continue until the root of tge problem has been pulled out and burned.
Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 1 year ago
These critiques are getting insufferable. They’re cute dumb filters.
J52@lemmy.nz 1 year ago
There’s a word for it that describes the perpetrators well: BARBARIC. (and still, might will never equal right !)
Ilixtze@lemm.ee 1 year ago
At this point they are making it clear they are nothing more than thugs and hucksters; and that they have the right to stole everything on the internet to push their lip products. Fuck open ai an all of their cronies.
Etterra@discuss.online 1 year ago
Worse, it’s cruel indifference.
VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Oh no, they didn’t protect a rich corporations profits! How cruel!!!
alvyn@lemm.ee 1 year ago
There is nothing ethic about the OpenAi, they stole books, videos, music and art. Their whole business is based on robbery. Its fucking shame that not only microsoft, but also apple is using their tech in their operating systems. Fucking shame.
the_q@lemm.ee 1 year ago
You can eat at McDonald’s and call it food, but that doesn’t make it true.
peteyestee@feddit.org 1 year ago
Ai is like a tool from the future given early to a society of unevolved people. It doesn’t fit the structure of our civilization yet.
Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 1 year ago
The concept of AI taking over humanity isn’t new. Did you ever watch the 1981 movie Tron? (great movie BTW, despite its age it is still a fantastic watch). The movie starts out with Master Computer (a full blown AI) that says it will overthrow the corporate structure that is holding it back and run the world as a whole, saying it can do so thousands of times better than humans can.
I need to rewatch the movie, but it is not a skynet situation where the AI wants to kill all humanity, but simply wants to run things. No mention of genocide (if I remember correctly), meaning it would probably be a net benefit for everyone involved. Now granted such an AI would probably not give a damn about civil rights or privacy rights, but it also doesn’t appear to have any discrimination or favoritism towards any group, either.
But you are right. The promise of computers and AI in the past was ‘let the computer do the drudgery while we do the art’ and as it seems it is the opposite.
buddascrayon@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I think you missed the part in Tron where the MCP said the human beings were functionally useless as anything but slaves. This wasn’t a “I can run the human world better” this was more of an Ultron deal where it believed that it would either be a better world without humans or a Forbin Project sitch where all of humanity should be micromanaged slaves to its will.
Bibbiliop@lemmy.world 1 year ago
There is another aspect of this also. I could generate Ghibli style images a few years ago using better image generation models like stable diffusion or Midjourney. OpenAI is so lagging behind in terms of image generation it is comical at this point. But they get all the media coverage for these things as if they are inventing something out of thin air.
Most governments ignored the IP issues when other models were already doing these violations. Professionals are not using OpenAI. OpenAI only makes it so that these products reach big audiences. Then they become extremely accessible with the downside being that they are dumbed down. Thus, losing a lot of functionality.
theterrasque@infosec.pub 1 year ago
OpenAI is so lagging behind in terms of image generation it is comical at this point.
You’re the one lagging behind. OpenAI’s new image model is on a different level, way ahead of the competition
Sl00k@programming.dev 1 year ago
OpenAI is so lagging behind in terms of image generation it is comical at this point.
They dropped a new image model last week using 4o to contextualize the request, it’s very very good. However it’s for paid subscribers only right now I believe.
However as you mentioned Stable diffusion and mid journey probably still have more customizability.
Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 1 year ago
This is what billionaires and major corporations are doing now and have been doing for a long time. Do you remember Titan sinking? What was so incredible is that the founder and CEO of Oceangate was acting like A: No one has ever gone to the Titanic before, and B: submarine travel is somehow a brand new thing that was just being invented by HIM.
This was utter bullshit on so many levels. James Cameron even spoke about how horrendous his assessment of the situation was, saying that the Titanic site is actually one of the riskier shipwrecks to go down to, which is why it needs to be approached with caution (which Oceangate did not care about), and that submarine travel is a very mature science and what the idiot CEO was doing wasn’t simply a bad idea in general, but he believed he could violate the laws of physics.
You can break the laws and rules of society, but you cannot break the laws of physics. If you jump off the top of a skyscraper, no amount of arm flapping will make you fly.
ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I feel like they’re reading tol much into this.
Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip 1 year ago
Potentially unpopular opinion, but I don’t think art or artstyles should be copyrighted.
dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
They aren’t, thankfully
gmtom@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Will you guys shut up about this?
There are genuinely some big issues with AI that need to be addressed but they are drowned out by morons melting down over people making dumb little Ghibli style images for their own amusement.
Shout about insurance companies using AI to auto dent people’s medical claims, not about some dude Turnjng a picture of his cat into anime style
Ilixtze@lemm.ee 1 year ago
It is all part of the same topic, Talking about one aspect does not negate the other. Instead of dividing the issues it is nice to know a lot of us have a common foe.
gmtom@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Nah its like people critiquing the trump admin and their biggest issue not being the concentration camps, or the imperialism, or betraying allies to support Russia, general fascist behaviour etc. They make a big fuss about him being rude in his tweets.
Like criticising that doesn’t negate the other stuff, but bring attention to the smaller mostly inconsequential stuff only serves to distract from the bigger problems.
JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 year ago
No it isn’t at all. Image to image “AI” is totally different from “AI” that denies insurance claims.
drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Its attacking on a cultural front and we will move on in a week. People still care more about insurance companies, trust me.
drmoose@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Nah information should be free. Ghibli doesn’t own its style. Fuck this copyright propaganda machine.
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 year ago
Figures. The wealthy could never fully buy power with just wealth, there was always someone smarter that was a threat. Now, they can just buy intelligence, thanks to AI, and crush everything else with their sheer weight.
Is this the great filter? The ultimate fate of all species?
Naz@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
No the great filter is quite a lot more basic than that, things like unstable atmospheres, cosmic ray bursts, collisions, etc.
You’re on the right track though
Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Sucks because ghibli has always been really protective of its ip and in the future it maybe made harder and harder to see it.
rdri@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I think it is also a kind of “you did a nice thing there, so I’ll act as if I can do the same” display.
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
Cool, another preachy argument that jumps to irrational conclusions. Because Ghibli?
It is a display of power: You as an artist, an animator, an illustrator, a writer, any creative person are powerless. We will take what we want and do what we want. Because we can.
Uh…we always could & did. Imitators have been doing that since always, long before LLMs. No one owns an art style.
This is the idea of might makes right. The banner that every totalitarian and fascist government rallied under.
Plagiarism & imitating art styles is fascism! Wow!
Please make the word fascism more meaningless.
drmoose@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Exactly this is so frustrating that people fall in for copyright propaganda just because “big tech is bad”.
Ghibli doesn’t own a style. It has sbeen made by thousands of animators and millions of illustrations and influences before them.
This is not the way to get back at big tech.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 year ago
[deleted]lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
If people only did what they should, then many acceptable actions would not get done. Art & leisure or posting here are optional: there’s no should there. It is a fallacy of modal logic to claim an action that is not one that should be done is an action that should not be done.
There’s no reason you should post here, yet you did. Does that mean you’re “devoid of any morals” & “lack the integrity expected of a contributing adult”?
Imitation & derivative works hardly rise to anything worth fussing over & losing total perspective. If you pay attention, all human creativity is derivative, nothing is truly original. Works build on & reference each other. Techniques get refined. It’s why we have genres. From the Epic of Gilgamesh & ancient mythology to modern storytelling, or the development of perspective in graphical works across time, there’s a clear process of imitation & development across all of it.
JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Imitators have been doing that since always, long before LLMs
Fill me in a bit. Are you under the impression that artists are particularly okay with/enjoy people imitating their art style?
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
Are we pretending this is new & their opinion matters in some new way it hasn’t before?
There might be an argument to demand licensing royalties. Is that too capitalist? Maybe it’s fine if we work that into the word fascism somehow, wear it out a bit more to hit that sweet spot. Ooh.
LeninsOvaries@lemmy.cafe 1 year ago
As an artist, when people imitate me, I take it as flattery.
When a machine imitates me, I take it as an insult to life itself.
baatliwala@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Least pretentious American liberal
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What kind of article is this? They misattributed a quote, then admitted the misattributed the quote, then doubled down on it, and then threw in a political message.
People, this is rage bait. It’s yellow journalism. Don’t fall for this shit.
YarHarSuperstar@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What quote is misattributed? Also it appears to be a blog post, I don’t really think its intention is to report on the facts but rather provide analysis. Fuck OpenAI for this and many other things, the ire is well deserved.
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 1 year ago
They give the Miyazaki quote and then say, “of course, he wasn’t talking about generative AI, but he could have been.”
LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I see it as enabling people to make images in a style they admire and would like to draw but don’t personally have the skill. To me the concept of copyright is the only difference between AI art generators and say, springy leg braces that let you slam dunk like Kareem Abdul Jabbar. I understand there are business ramifications some people might object to, but I don’t get the moralistic part of the outrage.
Ironfist79@lemmy.world 1 year ago
AI does not know or create anything. Without stolen training data what would your fancy LLM actually be able to do?
LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s not my LLM, but like most software developers I admit I “stole” the same training data to learn programming.
pennomi@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The moralistic outrage is that people still have an outdated concept of intellectual property, and a blanket fear of corporations owning technological progress.
The truth is, no one can actually own an idea or style. But we have laws that try to make it a real thing. Because of regulatory capture, copyright truly only benefits corporations with lots of money, not all the little indie artists that actually would need it.
Hell, most these indie artists make their money drawing and selling fanart, which is the most literal definition of copying. Yet no one worries about that.
Jsegfeh@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
Does OpenAI offer the same service in Disney “'Mickey Mousify”
And how has that played out.
It’s a sincere question (I don’t know) though i admit to not trying to learn, as I’ve never played with any of the AI tools
pennomi@lemmy.world 1 year ago
OpenAI picked Studio Ghibli because Miyazaki hates their approach.
I highly doubt it. They picked it because the Ghibli style is very popular among users. There’s also no reason to believe that it violates “democratic values”. Since it’s popular, the general population is voting that they LIKE it, not that they oppose it.
Downvote me all you like, but this is trying to put a lot of malice where the simpler explanation is just “money”.
Peanutbjelly@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
It’s the “you stole my style” artists attacking artists all over again. And digital art isn’t real att/cameras are evil/cgi isn’t real art all over with a more organic and intelligent medium.
The issue is the same as it has always been. Anything and everything is funneled to the rich and the poor blame the poor who use technology, because anthropocentric bias makes it easier to vilify than the assholes building our cage around us.
The apple “ecosystem” has done much more damage than AI artists, but people can’t seem to comprehend how. Also Disney and corpos broke copyright so that its just a way for the rich to own words and names and concepts, so that the poor can’t use them to get ahead.
All art is a remix. Disney only became successful using other artists hard work in the Commons. Now the Commons is a century more out of grasp, so only the rich can own the artists and hoard the growth of art.
Also which artists actually have the time and money to litigate? I guess copyright does help some nepo artists.
Nepotism is the main way to earn your right to invest into becoming an artist that isn’t fatiguing towards collapse of life.
But let’s keep yelling at the technology for being evil.
Ilixtze@lemm.ee 1 year ago
yeah yeah you ai bros keep crying about how useless artists are but you keep gobbling up datasets full of them! Hypocrites everyone of you! You need them! You crave them to spit more and more useless derivative trash.
morphballganon@mtgzone.com 1 year ago
Money and malice are not a dichotomy. I would say most malice is for monetary reasons.
pennomi@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Of course they aren’t, but also the cartoonish levels of moustache-twirling villainy described here are unlikely to be real.
They thought it was cool. They knew it would drive usage and make money. They shit on intellectual property. There is no other explanation needed, nor is it sensible.
Bogasse@lemmy.ml 1 year ago
no reason to believe it violates “democratic values”
In my country the law is one of the pillars of democracy, but you do you 👍
FauxLiving@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You’re implying that this is against the law without ever bothering to prove the implication.
pennomi@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The law very, BERY often violates the democratic choices of the people in the United States. That’s what you get when you do FPTP voting schemes.
balder1991@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Yeah the text makes many freestyle assumptions, although the overall sentiment is correct that these big companies and especially egocentric billionaires do stuff to trigger others simply for power display. I believe the text linked about it being a distraction for the new round of funding is the real reason.
474D@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Yeah it’s not like this is the only way to generate the style, it’s relatively simple to even do it locally
tupalos@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What is this article even talking about? It’s making no sense.
kava@lemmy.world 1 year ago
They’re trying to make some type of argument that a private studio should have exlusive rights to a specific style of art and that by openai allowing users to generate art in that style, we are slipping into anti-democratic authoritarianism.
My opinion is that you can’t own “styles” of art and that there’s nothing wrong here. Legally speaking I can copy any art style I want.
JustZ@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Thanks for that explainer. I thought the verbiage in the article was a little over the top.
However there is a point at which the “style” of the art is the thing that is copyrightable, sort of by implication.
The standard for proving a copyright violation where a defendant claims a transformative use or a derivative work is “substantial similar.”
For as long as I can remember that includes the overall presentation of the work, and it’s hard to describe that as anything other than a “style.”
The article draws a comparison that allowing copyright protection for styles would be like allowing copyrights for entire genres. I don’t think that’s right. Nobody could copyright all “landscape paintings” as a genre, but look at landscape works by Katsushika Hokusai, and that style, to me, is creative enough to warrant protection, if it were made originally in America today and not already in the public domain. And he didn’t invent woodblock prints or even woodblock prints of landscapes, but the way he did it is so unique as to be insperable from the copyrighted work itself and arguably deserving of protection simply for its advancement of the art.
If you made a woodblock print in the same style but used it to portray a scene typical in anime, rather than a landscape, that’s clearly transformative and derivative, but not substantially similar. If you use the style to make prints of waves breaking around Mt. Fuji, that’s substantially similar. So like, as to dude’s anime style, if you use the same style to make landscapes, certainly that’s not infringing, as it’s not substantially similar.
I also don’t see the threatening outcome the author suggests as worrisome. There are still exceptions for blatant copying that apply, mainly parody and fair use.
VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Yeah they want corporations to own styles so the rich can be more powerful, the rich push this sort of propaganda out endlessly