Maybe it is indicative of the level of creativity that is present in the human-made version?
Merged Artificial Intelligence
- Thread starter Puppycow
- Start date
- Featured
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
Or maybe the comments are mostly bots commenting to prime the algorithm. I still remember back when most YouTube comments were pretty negative. Am I misremembering? I remember people saying things like "never read the comments." And for the most part that seemed to be true.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
People often realize, but clearly most people don't. There are also people who realize and like it anyway.
I'm fascinated by anything AI and I even like this music, but I'm interested in genuine Japanese culture. So for me that's a letdown.
There is also tons of AI content on Facebook .. actually a bit less recently, maybe Facebook is filtering it out. And I don't mean pretty ladies. I've seen fake meteorological phenomenons, fake holiday photos, and even fake photos of trains in railway fan groups. Sure, railway fans spotted the impostors right away, but in general people don't realize at all.
And those were obviously fake photos. These days video is getting really good, most VEO3 videos can fool me, as long as it doesn't have something ridiculous, like talking dogs. It's not the image quality or inconsistencies what will give it away.
But then "boomers" will believe hoax tweets as a word of God. So will images and videos change much ? Hard to tell.
I also expect these services becoming better, and more readily available. And we're very close to real time video generation. You will be able to daydream all day long. The more respectable businesses will censor the crap out of it, of course, but the less respectable won't.
Maybe the whole idea of watching videos you didn't "dream up" yourself will just become obsolete ..
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
Just came across this, from the New York Times. It's not entirely about AI, but that's part of it.
Last edited:
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
I just saw his name come up in the Comic Swipes group on FB. I had definitely seen his "work" before but didn't realize it was so rampant and obvious.
Beelzebuddy
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,570
The Mona Lisa isn't under copyright, he absolutely can do that, although to comply with French trademark law he has to call it "Sparkling Giocondo."
But even so, it wouldn't be the prints or pen or the mustache you'd sue, but the lad trying to sell copies. I'd encourage people worried about AI to sit down with these tools and give them a real try, because there's an important discrepancy between how they're depicted vs actually used. I say "tool," because tool is what they are. You need to understand how they work and where they fail and set our with a goal in mind if you want good results.
AI doesn't make Darth Vader. A user telling it "make me Darth Vader" makes Darth Vader. Anyone saying otherwise is trying to scam everyone else as hard as they can get away with.
Last edited:
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
It's a way to look at it, but it's not entirely correct. If you want to make Dart Vader with mustache in Photoshop, you have to source the Dart Vader picture yourself. With AI service, you don't. It's like photoshop with huge stock image database built in.
Actually stock image databases, which are normally paid services, and which also create the stock images, are shafted the most by AI. Their business is just gone.
On the other hand, yes, it's up to user. If you use AI to create Dart Vader with mustache just to have a laugh, that seems like fair use. If you put it on t-shirt and sell it, it's clearly not.
Beelzebuddy
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,570
The point I was making is that it's you doing it. Whether you're drawing Darth Vader or editing a photo or using a stock service or carefully designing parameters or picking an image out of a pile of slop, you're still responsible. That doesn't change just because someone says "but AI," despite what AI companies and people rent seeking from AI companies want you to think.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
Yes, it's you doing it. But stock image service must hold copyright to those images. Stock image service cannot sell you images of Dart Vader. So why should AI service ?
Beelzebuddy
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,570
Why would you think an AI service would? If you sit down and draw a picture of Darth Vader, do you think you can (legally) sell it to someone else as a Darth Vader picture?
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
I guess it depends where you draw the line between "programmatically assembling snippets of clip art copyrighted by other people and never licensed as clip art" and "transformative work inspired in part by the work of others, transformed and made new by one individual's attempt to express qualia".
Personally, I wouldn't consider it an original work, if I asked an artist to create an original work, and instead they gave me a carefully-blended collage of other people's copyrighted work, repurposed as clip art without permission from the original artist.
I certainly wouldn't try to sell such a derivative work as a novel expression for which I deserved to be paid. Which is to say, I might use it for my own purposes, perhaps as a character illustration in a TTRPG campaign among friends. But I wouldn't try to sell on AI-generated images as my own clip art or bespoke artistic offerings.
Personally, I wouldn't consider it an original work, if I asked an artist to create an original work, and instead they gave me a carefully-blended collage of other people's copyrighted work, repurposed as clip art without permission from the original artist.
I certainly wouldn't try to sell such a derivative work as a novel expression for which I deserved to be paid. Which is to say, I might use it for my own purposes, perhaps as a character illustration in a TTRPG campaign among friends. But I wouldn't try to sell on AI-generated images as my own clip art or bespoke artistic offerings.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
No, you can't. Disney owns the design, not just the frames from the movie. If you sell image of Darth Vader, obviously some part of the value of the image, if not all, comes from the fact it's Dart Vader, not from how good you are at drawing.
Last edited:
Beelzebuddy
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2010
- Messages
- 10,570
Well, there's your answer. Stock photo companies aren't selling the images themselves, but the temporary right to use those images in a commercial manner. AI tools don't (or shouldn't) do that. Instead, like pens or cameras or Photoshop, they're just tools for image creation and it is (or should be) on the person using that system to do so responsibly.
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
The problem is that the end-user of the AI isn't conscientiously gathering references and composing their work in real-time.
The AI has already consumed a vast corpus of other people's work, to use as references on demand. It's more akin to maintaining a pirated clip art catalog, and asking for collages from a pirated clip art catalog.
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
I have purchased a couple of royalty-free clip art suites and have used those extensively without any worry about infringement. Sometimes I get clip art from free sites on the web, but even though they are "royalty-free", I can't be sure they weren't copied from some other, licensed site, so I rarely use them. I have seen, for example, multiple instances of a model on a 3D printing sites, and it's sometimes difficult to find who posted it first and what kind of license they attached to the original.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
That's where AI could be useful. It is possible to train AI to identify licensed content and tell you who it belongs to. Multimodal AIs like Chat GPT4o may already be able to do it, simple as byproduct of their training.
Posted this in a artists' thread in FC, it is appropriate here - this I feel is where the use of AI will end up, not just a prompt but an artist's own work being worked on by AI:
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena, Pronouns: he/him
It literally says right there "by any means".
If I paint a copy of the Mona Lisa, faithfully reproducing every brush stroke, is that not a "copy" because it wasn't done by mechanical means?
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena, Pronouns: he/him
Generative AI isn't making collages. It's making original works that resemble the clip art.
Dr.Sid
Philosopher
AI assisted
The point is it's creating original content, but based heavily on the content it was trained on. Collage analogy is not perfect, but it's pretty good I think.
