Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the "taken advantage of" thing is more about the crappy way they behaved on the Github issues ("really disappointing") etc than the idea of using his code.
Of the whole thing, this is what struck me as distasteful. Manipulative and degrading. The French kids owe the Stanford kid like half to all of it.
Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
101–110 of 146 posts
Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#102I have sympathy for the author's frustration but they open-sourced their work under a very permissive license. It sounds comical that suddenly something becomes valuable because you hang it in a gold frame, make minor modifications to it and ascribe it some symbolism. But that is exactly how contemporary artworks are done. If you go to exhibits and auctions, it is not uncommon to see highly valued work that requires…
Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#103I wonder if the person who bought it will sue for damages when the AI program is inevitably used to spit out millions of similar portraits on demand.
Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#104Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#105The work of Art is the act of putting it up for auction on Christie's. That's what makes it a conceptual piece that is being discussed. People often mistake art for a form of labor production. They expect that labor has to have been performed to create value. But that all changed in the early 20th century. I really feel bad for Dr. Beef, this must really hurt. But according to the twitter thread ( https://twitter.com…
"...they still could have just rewritten the same code and it would have escaped the licensing." I may be misinterpreting your intent, but this seems disingenuous to me. I can't go look at the Linux kernel, then 'rewrite' [the same code] with my fingers and keyboard to escape copyright ownership of Linux kernel contributors. I can rewrite code that implements a described process. Or code that implements a described i…
Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#106I have sympathy for the author's frustration but they open-sourced their work under a very permissive license. It sounds comical that suddenly something becomes valuable because you hang it in a gold frame, make minor modifications to it and ascribe it some symbolism. But that is exactly how contemporary artworks are done. If you go to exhibits and auctions, it is not uncommon to see highly valued work that requires…
IIRC, isn't art used as a tax dodge these days? That and a giant influx of money from countries that don't historically buy a lot of art (e.g. China)
Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
This dude set up a "this is for free" sign and then some other dudes just swooped in saying "we'll take all of this" and then just replaced the sign with "$500k". The problem with this is that it disincentivizes the sharing mentality. Nobody wants to be the guy who gets taken advantage of, yet everyone benefits from free sharing of knowledge. And then once in a while you have dudes who swoop in and make everyone look…
>This dude set up a "this is for free" sign and then some other dudes just swooped in saying "we'll take all of this" and then just replaced the sign with "$500k". This loses the important nuance that them swooping in and slapping a price tag on their own use of the implementation doesn't deprive anyone of access to the original on the same terms they were able to access it. No one has lost anything in this scenario.…
Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#108I have sympathy for the author's frustration but they open-sourced their work under a very permissive license. It sounds comical that suddenly something becomes valuable because you hang it in a gold frame, make minor modifications to it and ascribe it some symbolism. But that is exactly how contemporary artworks are done. If you go to exhibits and auctions, it is not uncommon to see highly valued work that requires…
What highly valued work that requires little sophistication to produce have you seen at exhibits and auctions?
Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#109Twitter thread from the author of the original algorithm: https://twitter.com/DrBeef_/status/1055285640420483073 (worth reading the whole thread, the art collective reply) GitHub link: https://github.com/robbiebarrat/art-dcgan The README was last edited 6 months ago and contains the bolded text: "When using any outputs of the models, credit me. Don't sell the outputs of the pre-trained models, modified or not. If you…
Re: Christie’s sells its first AI portrait for $432k
#110The results are so amateurish though. What’s with those nasty deconvolution artifacts?