WotC So it seems D&D has picked a side on the AI art debate.

[Charlaquin]

My question to the thread is....If this art (which I absolutely LOVE) is just someone else's art chopped up and redelivered, how do I go about finding the original artist?

I mean, there isn’t like, an individual artist that could be credited with having provided the basis for this image that Dall-E then edited. Dall-E was probably “trained” on an enormous database of works from various artists, few to none of whom ever agreed to have their works used in that way, or were even asked. When you told Dall-E to make an image of a medieval knight riding a giant snake up a pyramid (or whatever), it looked through that database for what elements of those works its programming predicted would best match your prompt, and then generated an image imitating those elements.

 

[theCourier]

@Charlaquin
I don't think the march of progress is slowing down any time soon. And that's the way I like it. As should you, considering how flawed your arguments are. There are still tons of jobs for humans. Not only in the care or social sector but also craftsmen (craftpeople? craftfolk?) are in high demand. And you need technological advances in order to feed a growing populace. You could have, however, become more technologically advanced with a decreasing populace (like Japan, even though that creates other problems). Also, if you want to see what happens when certain nations get a technological edge, take a look at the past 500 years of human history, especially the 19th century.
If you want to support artists that fear for their livelihoods, support them in learning another trade. The technology exists, people will use it, it will get better. You can try to outlaw it, but that's impossible to enforce without extreme collateral damage (which would affect other people's livelihoods).

So callous. This AI Art thing isn't some noble "march of progress" situation. It's not improving any quality of life, for instance. And you're happy to say "oh, they can just learn another job lol" as if that doesn't take time and effort (also, consider that maybe they'd be happy selling commissions and doing art and don't want to be potentially pushed out of that?). Plus, where does it end? How many more jobs does automation and AI have to encroach upon before we finally think, "Hey, maybe we should think this out beforehand?"

 

[Clint_L]

So callous. This AI Art thing isn't some noble "march of progress" situation. It's not improving any quality of life, for instance.

Says you. I have really enjoyed using ChatGPT and have already used it to speed up my adventure design substantially, as well as repetitive writing tasks.

Is automation in general making the world a better place? Is progress? Average standards of living, lifespans, etc. are way better, and I particularly like not risking dying of diarrhea because I drank the wrong water. On the other hand, we are possibly destroying our planet. So that's bad.

I don't think there's much point in trying to stop progress though. That has never worked, not even once. Better to try to mitigate it and figure out where the potential harms are in advance so we can do a better job avoiding the pitfalls. For example, we should be responding right now to the inevitable impact that AI is going to have on information workers.

 

[Clint_L]

Putting your stuff on Pinterest does NOT mean you are making it public domain. Read the terms of service. You grant rights to Pinterest and its users solely for the purpose of operating and using Pinterest. At no point are you offering up your work to be harvested for AI training or anything else.

But you are offering it up to other minds to study and absorb into their repertoire of art. Which might well be reflected in someone else's next project. This is the history of art - people read, see, hear, taste, touch something, and then they start incorporating it.

It's not a question of whether people use art from other people, it's just a question of where to draw the line so that the original artist gets credit. These AIs raise the same issue.

 

[Deset Gled]

Spoiler: training data

Training data[edit]​

Stable Diffusion was trained on pairs of images and captions taken from LAION-5B, a publicly available dataset derived from Common Crawl data scraped from the web, where 5 billion image-text pairs were classified based on language and filtered into separate datasets by resolution, a predicted likelihood of containing a watermark, and predicted "aesthetic" score (e.g. subjective visual quality).[15] The dataset was created by LAION, a German non-profit which receives funding from Stability AI.[15][16] The Stable Diffusion model was trained on three subsets of LAION-5B: laion2B-en, laion-high-resolution, and laion-aesthetics v2 5+.[15] A third-party analysis of the model's training data identified that out of a smaller subset of 12 million images taken from the original wider dataset used, approximately 47% of the sample size of images came from 100 different domains, with Pinterest taking up 8.5% of the subset, followed by websites such as WordPress, Blogspot, Flickr, DeviantArt and Wikimedia Commons.[17][15]

They get free hosting in most cases. It seems they can even opt out of the dataset while still enjoying the free hosting. Don't like it? pay for your own hosting. Don't want to do that? opt out for your image.

I am reminded of one of the koans of the internet: If you use a service and the service is free, you are not the customer. You are the product.

 

[tetrasodium]

Putting your stuff on Pinterest does NOT mean you are making it public domain. Read the terms of service. You grant rights to Pinterest and its users solely for the purpose of operating and using Pinterest. At no point are you offering up your work to be harvested for AI training or anything else.

And anybody can post an image to Pinterest. Most of the images I've seen there were clearly posted by someone other than the creator. Using Pinterest to "launder" stolen art doesn't make it not stolen.

Spoiler: it means you agree to this

More simply put




If you choose to post content, you give us permission to use it to provide and improve Pinterest. Copies of content shared with others may remain even after you delete the content from your account.

 

[Mecheon]

The problem of course, @tetrasodium, is that doesn't include "You own this image". Pintrist is like, the biggest image stealing website on the internet. I wouldn't call a website where I could just steal anything you've created and then just re-upload it against your wishes, without any need to credit you ever, a boon for its 'free image hosting'

Seriously, even other image reposting websites at least credit and link back to the original

 

[theCourier]

Says you. I have really enjoyed using ChatGPT and have already used it to speed up my adventure design substantially, as well as repetitive writing tasks.

Is automation in general making the world a better place? Is progress? Average standards of living, lifespans, etc. are way better, and I particularly like not risking dying of diarrhea because I drank the wrong water. On the other hand, we are possibly destroying our planet. So that's bad.

I don't think there's much point in trying to stop progress though. That has never worked, not even once. Better to try to mitigate it and figure out where the potential harms are in advance so we can do a better job avoiding the pitfalls. For example, we should be responding right now to the inevitable impact that AI is going to have on information workers.

You not spending so much time writing an adventure is not a quality of life improvement, lmao. That's barely anything, that's like saying autocorrect is improving my life by saving me the effort of correcting typos. You're just saving some time on a leisure activity, it's not like how automobiles increased people's ability to get around and for goods to be transported, etc.

And also, realistically, the chances that we avoid the pitfalls and harms are only likely if AI is curbed to some degree by the law. You can't have it both ways, progress can't "march on" unimpeded AND you can't have people be unaffected by the encroachment of AI and other types of automation on their livelihoods. You can say ALL you want about "oh man I hope something gets done about it", but I bet you'll be one of the many angry people suddenly enraged at the prospect of AI being limited or banned in some way, as it should.

 

[Cordwainer Fish]

like saying autocorrect is improving my life by saving me the effort of correcting typos

My writing is usually worse after autocorrupt has gotten its hands on it.

 

[gamerprinter]

I'm never involved in WotC's decisions, so I don't personally judge them overly much. I'm 3PP, what I choose to create with is my only concern. Because I am a professional 3D illustrator, and prolific freelance cartographer of some renown, why would I ever choose to use AI in the production of my art. I wouldn't, so this decision, in no way impacts nor applies to me. I also do my own writing, game design, game development, graphic design and publishing, none of which I require AI assistance to any gain. So I don't care in the larger community decisions, I always make my own decision. I stand my ground. I'm not anti-AI, I just don't need it.