Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 9517525" data-attributes="member: 6779196">Which could not have been made without their labor, and their labor is part of the price of the image. This is just basic economics.No, see, the equivalent to cooking your own burger in this analogy is making your own art. You may protest, “but I’m not a good artist.” Yeah, that’s why it’s skilled labor. The ability to make quality art is something that takes a great deal of training and practice to learn to do, and in most cases that training is extremely expensive. Accordingly, people who have that skill can charge more for it, because the demand is greater than the supply. Again, basic economics.Right, you’re supporting the people who are building tools designed to steal labor value. See, the thing is, those LLMs don’t just make images ex nihilo. They have to be trained how to make those images by feeding them hundreds of thousands of examples, all of which were made by artists and not paid for. This is the point where the burger analogy breaks down, but if we were to force it to fit, you’d be paying people who made some sort of burger-cloning machine that all the chefs and short order cooks and fast food line workers of the world were forced to contribute feedback to developing.Sure, if you’re willing to under-charge for your own labor, that’s a choice you’re free to make. Or, maybe it’s a choice you’re forced to make to keep your prices competitive because of market forces outside your control. These are factors artists also deal with. But, DMing is a less specialized skill than most visual art, so it’s generally in greater supply. Regardless, the cost is the cost. If people want the product, they can pay what’s being asked for it, or they can learn to make the product for themselves, or they can accept not having the product. Stealing the product is generally not considered a socially acceptable option, with good reason, because society generally requires trust to function. But, in this case, there are widely available art theft machines, and people are just accepting their existence. Pardon me if I refuse.Labor is part of the cost of literally any product. That’s why products cost more than the net value of their raw materials.Yes, because the labor value isn’t part of the cost of AI-generated images, because that labor was stolen. Machines can’t make art. What they do is redistribute and recombine a small portion of the labor done by countless artists, without compensating them for that labor. If the owners of these LLMs actually had to pay royalties to the artists whose work the LLMs were trained on, you can bet your ass the products would be a lot more expensive. Probably more expensive than buying direct from an artist, because the LLM owners would still want their cut (and reasonably so; the creation of those models did take work, and the people who did that work should be fairly compensated for it).</blockquote>

Verification