Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 9079903" data-attributes="member: 6795602">What you describe here doesn't meet the definition of theft.&nbsp; And suggesting that we are saying the AI companies have done nothing wrong is absolutely inaccurate.&nbsp; What we say is that it's very wrong but it's a wrong other than theft.There's alot of assumptions here.1.&nbsp; Even if it's completely true that current AI's get worse without human input, that doesn't imply that will always be the case.&nbsp; LLM AI's are a relatively new field.2.&nbsp;&nbsp; There's alot of 'free' art out there.&nbsp; Categorizing which is which might be an immediate problem, but it won't be for long.&nbsp; As long as there is sufficient 'free' art then you don't have to worry about the degradation those articles mention.Yea, it's quite a conundrum.&nbsp; How do you get people to hire you without showing your work and how do you show your work without having it potentially copied.&nbsp; IMO.&nbsp; In the past the risk of having your works copied was relatively low.&nbsp; Even if someone did so it likely didn't impact any potential jobs you might get.&nbsp; But AI is different and even if it doesn't copy your art, it can still disrupt your means of making a living by potentially being vastly cheaper, supposing it got enough free or cheap art elsewhere.At the end of the day though - the real issue with ai isn't it copying your art - it's ai putting you out of business - and it can do that without ever needing your art.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 9079903, member: 6795602"] What you describe here doesn't meet the definition of theft. And suggesting that we are saying the AI companies have done nothing wrong is absolutely inaccurate. What we say is that it's very wrong but it's a wrong other than theft. There's alot of assumptions here. 1. Even if it's completely true that current AI's get worse without human input, that doesn't imply that will always be the case. LLM AI's are a relatively new field. 2. There's alot of 'free' art out there. Categorizing which is which might be an immediate problem, but it won't be for long. As long as there is sufficient 'free' art then you don't have to worry about the degradation those articles mention. Yea, it's quite a conundrum. How do you get people to hire you without showing your work and how do you show your work without having it potentially copied. IMO. In the past the risk of having your works copied was relatively low. Even if someone did so it likely didn't impact any potential jobs you might get. But AI is different and even if it doesn't copy your art, it can still disrupt your means of making a living by potentially being vastly cheaper, supposing it got enough free or cheap art elsewhere. At the end of the day though - the real issue with ai isn't it copying your art - it's ai putting you out of business - and it can do that without ever needing your art. [/QUOTE]

Verification