AI/LLMs AI art bans are going to ruin small 3rd party creators

[FrogReaver]

You're making a complete distinction between to produce and to create, a disputable premise, for starter. Nature creates stuff all the time, for instance, it's what it does.
But fine, ok, Nature produces and doesn't create because to create is "to conceive a design", in your mind.

I don’t know where to draw the lines but mental creation and physical creation are somewhat different things.

In this case, there was a lot of design in the training data, and in the algorithm. Designs in which you have taken no part.

Agreed. The same can be said for paintbrush design, though the impact on the final product is likely much much less.

The fact that all these previous designs are so merged now that we can't link them to one specific name or origenator doesn't make all the previous designs involved magically disappear. It just obfuscates them.

Which seems to be exactly what happens with human art creation as well. I don’t think every artist even consciously knows what all works inspired a particular work. It’s obfuscated. He can probably nail down the major influences but certainly not all. AI doesn’t do even that yet, though it’s not certain some future iteration could not.

 

[Brendan Byrd]

1. Depends on your application.
2. That uncertainty itself depends on yet to be settled legal precedents and possibly future laws.

I don’t disagree.

(IMHO, IANAL, yada, yada…)
While I know it doesn’t directly apply, I cannot help but make the comparison between “attractive hazard/nuisanse” and the way some of the AI/LLM tools are being presented.

 

[Gorgon Zee]

So are we back to the part of the loop where it’s claimed you are not the creator because the one doing the actual image creation is the creator. But you are part of what’s creating that image, as previously discussed with fairly wide agreement, philosophically creation for that image gets attributed to those directly having a hand in making it. Your prompt certainly was a piece of the image creation process. So you are at least partial creator?

That's a philosophical question that doesn't require AI to discuss. Much art is guided by a patron or client, but we don't tend to think of them as creators. We don't give them rights to the work unless they have explicit contracts to say they do.

To me, when I look at The Last Supper, I never think "Sforza is a great creator in the way he commissioned this". It's all Da Vinci; or rather the part played by the commissioning is so minor that we don't really consider it creation. Or at least I don't, and I guess the law doesn't either.

So maybe that's a good way to think of AI art prompts -- they commission the creation of art, setting guidance and direction. But they are not creating art.

 

[Bohandas]

This is the oddest thing I've read so far today!

Somebody had to say it! Think about it. A product that somebody made but nobody uses is just a waste of resources, but a product that somebody uses but nobody made is - by the fact of somebody using it - as valid as anything.

Over the past century and a half or so people have wasted so much breath on labor versus capital without once stopping to consider that taken together they are only half of the equation, and that the existence of that half only makes sense in the context of the other half

 

[Umbran]

... providing most of their own power via renewables or modular nuclear generators

Only China and Russia have built operational small modular nuclear reactors. There's like 120+ designs out there, but only a couple of implementations.

and / or investing in carbon capture in sufficient amounts to compensate

I don't think that likely. There aren't many industrial scale carbon capture plants out there, and only like half a dozen are associated with power generation, iirc.

 

[VHawkwinter]

Only China and Russia have built operational small modular nuclear reactors. There's like 120+ designs out there, but only a couple of implementations.

Huh. I've been hearing of them since 2018. I thought they were being deployed already. Okay, noted.

I don't think that likely. There aren't many industrial scale carbon capture plants out there, and only like half a dozen are associated with power generation, iirc.

Noted. I wonder what kind of logic they're using to make those claims of approaching carbon neutrality then.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's a philosophical question that doesn't require AI to discuss. Much art is guided by a patron or client, but we don't tend to think of them as creators. We don't give them rights to the work unless they have explicit contracts to say they do.

Yes. In those examples there is an actual different creator, another person, an artist creating the art. Though this can quickly approach partnership and colloborative work depending on how involved the patron/benefactor is.

So maybe that's a good way to think of AI art prompts -- they commission the creation of art, setting guidance and direction. But they are not creating art.

Are you fully ready to accept all the consequences of claiming the ai is the creator of the works it produces, especially how that relates to the ownership of said works?

 

[Umbran]

Noted. I wonder what kind of logic they're using to make those claims of approaching carbon neutrality then.

Increased use of renewables, efficiency improvements, and carbon offsets (which are not capture) are often used to claim reduced net emissions.

 

[kigmatzomat]

How do we get from here, where the art was unethically trained, to a Star Trek style holodeck.
Cause that's what I think of AI as being good for in a "tool" fashion.

Notice how much of their stuff was "classics" like shakespeare and Sherlock Holmes? It was trained on works out of copyright, in the public domain.

Do that.

I'd like image and text LLMs trained solely on pre-20th century art & literature.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Notice how much of their stuff was "classics" like shakespeare and Sherlock Holmes? It was trained on works out of copyright, in the public domain.

"Claude, write me a one paragraph email to use to spam small business owners to see if they need any search engine optimization, landscaping work, or a ride to the airport."

"Most esteemed proprietor of commerce, I deduce from the elementary evidence of thy struggling web presence, thy overgrown hedgerows, and thy woeful lack of conveyance to yon aerodrome, that thou art in dire want of my most singular services! By the raven locks of Hamlet's ghost and the keen eye of my magnifying glass, I have observed — for I am not merely a man who sees, but one who observes — that thy Google rankings doth protest too much, thy shrubbery hath all the dignity of a villain's lair in the Sussex countryside, and thy journey to the airport is like Lear wandering the heath: long, tragic, and wholly unnecessary. Fear not, good merchant, for whether thou requirest thy search engine optimised with the precision of a Baker Street investigation, thy grounds trimmed with the grace of a Midsummer Night's dream, or a reliable carriage to Terminal B at a most reasonable rate, I stand ready to serve — and the game, as they say, is most decidedly afoot."