11–20 of 207 posts
I don't understand the point the post is trying to make. Maybe it's generated? HN sure likes to upvote stuff with AI in the title.
Isn’t it likely that patent law is going to lock ai down? One company will finally crack something general-enough in a way that gets it way ahead, will patent it, and will use that monopoly to gain control of the whole space, and the monopoly will never go away because all further improvements will also get patented by the ai legal team? The brief openness of ai right now is a glitch in the system that will get irone…
This wasn't true of software, so I don't know that we should expect it to be true of AI.
Isn’t it likely that patent law is going to lock ai down? One company will finally crack something general-enough in a way that gets it way ahead, will patent it, and will use that monopoly to gain control of the whole space, and the monopoly will never go away because all further improvements will also get patented by the ai legal team? The brief openness of ai right now is a glitch in the system that will get irone…
AI is really a black box, which should make patenting specific implementations of it very difficult. Even if you do manage to patent something like a diffusion model of image creation, in order to enforce it against someone who was willing to go to court, you'd have to get into a deeper discussion of exactly how your AI works than you may want to.
My guess is AI will be more the realm of trade secrets than patents - it'll be the Coke recipe of big tech.
I am not sure I see the unbundling here. AI generated art may be a threat to generic stock photography and small jobs for custom blog art, but artists higher up on the food chain now have a new tool for them to use. They can quickly generate a bunch of concepts to tryout ideas, and polish those into a higher quality piece of art than if left to their own devices.
I can immediately recognize (as I did for this post) when art is AI generated right now. I've spent a lot of time playing with SD and while it's been a blast as a toy, the vast majority of the outputs are 'meh' and even the best still have those weird artifacts that stick out like a sore thumb.
Just like the clip art ascetic quickly becomes recognizable and somewhat nauseating, so too is AI generated art already starting to feel that way.
As far as aiding experts I don't imagine synthetic art will be nearly as game changing as the Adobe suite. I do a fair bit of writing and find GPT-3 to be completely unnecessary for "quickly generating a bunch of concepts". I assume that visual arts, like writers, already have a bunch of ideas in their head for what to do. That's never the bottle neck. Writers block happens but it's not because you can't think of a general concept, it's because implementing that specific concept into text is what's hard.
I am not sure I see the unbundling here. AI generated art may be a threat to generic stock photography and small jobs for custom blog art, but artists higher up on the food chain now have a new tool for them to use. They can quickly generate a bunch of concepts to tryout ideas, and polish those into a higher quality piece of art than if left to their own devices.
I agree. I see AI-generated art as a force multiplier for skilled individuals, same as better editors, tools, languages, and frameworks have been for developers.
A force multiplier, allowing existing professionals to generate more art.
The creation of a new profession. Digital artists are already doing a very different job with very different tools. These tools will be another step and there will be demand for human and generated art in different applications.
The empowerment of non artists. Same as how digital art democratized art. This will let people without hours of skill generate images of their liking with relatively minimal effort. Anyone can generate scenarios or images, even if they aren't perfect.
These aren't exclusive and will probably all happen at the same time. It will also 100 percent devalue artists work since it's now easier to meet people's needs. This won't make them obsolete, but it'll reduce demand and put people out of business.
Otherwise- really good points, well-written
I am not sure I see the unbundling here. AI generated art may be a threat to generic stock photography and small jobs for custom blog art, but artists higher up on the food chain now have a new tool for them to use. They can quickly generate a bunch of concepts to tryout ideas, and polish those into a higher quality piece of art than if left to their own devices.
I don't think AI generated art is even a threat to stock photography, but rather clip art... which isn't too disruptive in my view. I can immediately recognize (as I did for this post) when art is AI generated right now. I've spent a lot of time playing with SD and while it's been a blast as a toy, the vast majority of the outputs are 'meh' and even the best still have those weird artifacts that stick out like a sore…
- Before writing, ideas had to be distributed orally.
- Before the printing press, distributed copies had to be written by hand.
- Before the internet, distribution required thousands of physical copies to be produced.
That's not to say that we've ignored creation. We've built hundreds of tools to make producing content easier: word processors, Photoshop, and even TikTok to name a few. It's just that AI has recently taken a huge leap in this area. For that reason, I don't think "unbundling" is the right metaphor here.