Sadly, ai has been overtaken by thieves and sociopaths led by sama and others like him.
GPL 4 here we come. Training a model with such code will require the model to be open source.
On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
51–60 of 957 posts
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#52> But I can't even get cartoons to most people for free now, without doing unpaid work for the profit-making companies who own the most use channels of communication This is the sticking point for me. OpenAI isn't a profit-making company, but it's certainly a valuable company. A valuable company that is built from the work of content others created without transferring any value back to them. Regardless of legalities…
I thought this was more of a reference to Facebook, etc. I could be wrong, though, it's pretty vague.
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair use, if it does indeed apply, doesn't care about license
I doubt it's still fair use if you become one of most valuable companies, hence the word "fair" in fair use.
The fair in fair use has nothing to do with the size of a company. If Disney produces a satire of Penny Arcade, that's still fair use of Penny Arcade's IP.
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#54The argument here seems more mad at the decline of the ability of an individual to promote their work on social media channels (which is indeed a problem that's getting worse for reasons unrelated to generative AI) rather than losing money to people making AI art with Midjourney.
The point is that they no longer have a choice not to enrich profit-seeking companies with their unpaid labor, because by posting to those sites, you're generating the content they place their ads beside. And then pointing out that at least with social media, they had a choice in the matter, while AI scrapers just take it, wherever they might have posted it.
Why is the author so concerned about enriching profit-seeking companies?
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#55The sooner anyone making profit from models trained on creators proprietary content start paying for the content they’re using the better for creators, society and even the AI companies. It’s pretty tiring hearing people argue about whether copyright law applies to AI companies or not. It applies. Just get on and sort out a proper licensing model.
> It applies. If only saying it would make it so. Unfortunately, it's not easy to make this legal argument given how copyright law only protects fixed, tangible expressions, not ideas, concepts, principles, etc. and has a gaping hole called 'fair use.'
The new York Times has examples where GPT will reproduce world for word exactly paragraphs of their (copyrighted) text if you ask it to. That's a pretty fixed tangible expression I think.
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#56> But I can't even get cartoons to most people for free now, without doing unpaid work for the profit-making companies who own the most use channels of communication This is the sticking point for me. OpenAI isn't a profit-making company, but it's certainly a valuable company. A valuable company that is built from the work of content others created without transferring any value back to them. Regardless of legalities…
It would be good to see how much it changes if you only include work that is public domain.
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is that they no longer have a choice not to enrich profit-seeking companies with their unpaid labor, because by posting to those sites, you're generating the content they place their ads beside. And then pointing out that at least with social media, they had a choice in the matter, while AI scrapers just take it, wherever they might have posted it.
Why is the author so concerned about enriching profit-seeking companies?
Fixed, should have specified "unpaid labor." Hopefully that makes it clear.
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#58I wonder what effects AI ripping off today's artists will have on the next generation. They will grow up with AI "art" generators. Will they be concerned enough about AI-ripping them off that the don't put out novel, "human-made" works of art? Will they put down the AI tools long enough to learn "manual" forms of art?
Yeah, it's over. Why would a kid want to spend thousands of hours practicing with pencil and paper, when they can get a much more impressive result by typing a couple of words on a web site?
The same reason there's been a huge resurgence in rediscovering "artisanal" methods in many fields.
The same reason that photorealism as an artistic movement still exists despite photography existing.
The same reason people still learn to play the piano.
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#59I wonder what effects AI ripping off today's artists will have on the next generation. They will grow up with AI "art" generators. Will they be concerned enough about AI-ripping them off that the don't put out novel, "human-made" works of art? Will they put down the AI tools long enough to learn "manual" forms of art?
"Art" will move into a direction that's harder to copy, artists will use ML models to help them create, people will develop a sense of what is AI generated and it will begin to feel cheap. It's already pretty obvious, like the blog posts with AI generated images on the top. There's already a trend of people taking out of focus and motion blurred selfies.
In whatever direction it takes, art will find what is difficult or obvious for AI to fake and then that will be valued.
Think of it like this, aluminum used to be prized by kings, honored guests would get aluminum cutlery instead of gold. Aluminum got cheap, there are still fancy spoons.
Re: On being listed as an artist whose work was used to train Midjourney
#60[deleted]