I do understand why so many people, especially creative folks, are worried about AI and how it’s used. The future is quite unknown, and things are changing very rapidly, at a pace that can feel out…
Statistical analysis of existing literary works is certainly not the same sort of thing as generating new literary works based on models trained on old ones.
donuts@kbin.social 1 year ago
AI people just love to disingenuously claim that anybody who criticizes AI "fears" the technology. This is their way of dismissing all critics or skeptics as luddites, and is usefully based entirely of their desire to profit somehow off of the trend.
Artists don't "fear" AI... They simply want big tech billionaires to stop stealing their copyrighted art works or other intellectual property in the hopes of generating infinite junk "content".
FMT99@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Your comment doesn’t appear to apply to this article at all. It explicitly states that this tool was neither stealing copyrighted art nor a billionaire funded venture.
In this case it really was the unfounded fear of AI that killed a useful tool via misplaced outrage.
stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 1 year ago
Yeah, but that’s not what this tool was? It analyzed writing styles, not copied them.
CyanFen@lemmy.one [bot] 1 year ago
That’s also what art AI does. It analyzes art styles, then creates unique works based on its “inspiration”
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Still waiting on that copyright infringement evidence all of the anti-ai people claim is out there.
brap_gobbo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
My brother in Christ, if I steal all of your writings and art when you’re not looking, chop them up, eat them, and shit them out, they are still your creations-- just now covered in shit, garbled up, and without your original thoughts and intentions put behind them. If I then sell the pile of shit to someone, I am profiting from your labor.
I would be less inclined to hate this if I got some form of royalty or even some form of compensation for the hours and hours I’ve spent planning, creating, editing, and studying to make my things.
Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
There are also financial incentives to oppose the adoption of content generating AI. As the spinning jenny replaced hand spinning and electric trolleys replaced horse drawn streetcars, there was always strong financially motivated opposition. How is it different this time?
SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Because at some point we will automate people completely out of jobs, and then they will have nowhere to go. Our system isn’t set up to handle that.
People are already struggling to find jobs with a liveable wage.
BakedGoods@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
AI made creating art accessible for the masses. What these artists are doing now is going to limit it’s creation to corporations. Great.
brap_gobbo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Art is already accessible to the masses. It was accessible to cavemen. It’s called picking up a pencil, rock, mud, paper, paint, macaroni, feathers, literally anything in your world and making something of it. Everyone has the ability to be an artist. What the AI bros are complaining about is that they want an easy and instant way to replace years and lifetimes of perfecting one’s craft, while piggybacking off of and stealing said labor to profit from it.
stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 1 year ago
Stealing people’s hard work to spit out make copies isn’t making art “accessible for the masses.” Artists worked hard to be able to produce the art AI spits out.
milady@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s always “us vs them” huh. I’ll wager you don’t know anything about AI