Earlier quoted context omitted.
My issue with this line of argument is that it’s anthropomorphizing machines. It’s fine to compare how humans do a task with how a machine does a task, but in the end they are very different from each other, organic vs hardware and software logic. First, you need to prove that generative AI works fundamentally the same way as humans at the task of learning. Next you have to prove that it recalls information in the sa…
What we actually need to prove is whether such technology is a net benefit to society all else is essentially hand waving. There is no natural right to poorly named intellectual property and even if there was such a matter would never be decided based on the outcome of a philosophical argument because we don't decide anything that way.
Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
151–160 of 710 posts
Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#152Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#153Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#154I’m completely flabbergasted by the number of comments implying copyright concepts such as “fair use” or “derivative work” apply to trained ML models. Copyright is for _people_, as are the entailing rights, responsibilities and exemptions. This has gone far beyond anthropomorphising and we need to like get it together, man!
Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet, some people don't even want their artwork studied in schools. Even if you argue that an AI is "human enough" the artists should still have the right to refuse their art being studies.
> the artists should still have the right to refuse their art being studies. Why? That certainly isn't a right spelled out in either patents or copyrights, both of which are supposed to support the development of arts and technology, not hinder it. If I discover a new mathematical formula, musical scale, or whatnot, should I be able to prevent others from learning about it?
It’s yours. That’s literally what copyright is there to enforce.
Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#156This seems to introduce levels of artifacts that many artists would find unacceptable: https://twitter.com/sini4ka111/status/1748378223291912567 The rumblings I'm hearing are that this a) barely works with last-gen training processes b) does not work at all with more modern training processes (GPT-4V, LLaVA, even BLIP2 labelling [1]) and c) would not be especially challenging to mitigate against even should it become…
I can’t really see any difference in those images on the Twitter example when viewing it on mobile
Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#157Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#158To protect an individual's image property rights from image generating AI's -- wouldn't it be simpler for the IETF (or other standards-producing group) to simply create an AI image exclusion standard , similar to "robots.txt" -- which would tell an AI data-gathering web crawler that a given image or set of images -- was off-limits for use as data? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robots.txt https://www.ietf.org/
And then what? The scrapers themselves already happily ignore copyright, they won't be inclined to obey a no-ai.txt. So someone would have to enforce the standard. Currently I see no organisation who would be willing to do this or even just technologically able - as even just detecting such scrapers is an extremely hard task. Nevertheless, I hope that at some not-so-far point in the future there will be more legal gu…
Name two entities that were asked to stop using a given individuals' images that failed to stop using them after the stop request was issued.
>Currently I see no organisation who would be willing to do this or even just technologically able - as even just detecting such scrapers is an extremely hard task.
// Part of Image Web Scraper For AI Image Generator ingestion psuedocode:
if fileExists("no-ai.txt") {
// Abort image scraping for this site -- move on to the next site
} else { // Continue image scraping for this site
};See? Nice and simple!
Also -- let me ask you this -- what happens to the intellectual property (or just plain property) rights of Images on the web after the author dies? Or say, 50 years (or whatever the legal copyright timeout is) after the author dies?
Legal grey area perhaps?
Also -- what about Images that exist in other legal jurisdictions -- i.e., other countries?
How do we know what set of laws are to apply to a given image?
?
Point is: If you're going to endorse and/or construct a legal framework (and have it be binding -- keep in mind you're going to have to traverse the legal jurisdictions of many countries, many countries!) -- you might as well consider such issues.
Also -- at least in the United States, we have Juries that can override any Law (Separation of Powers) -- that is, that which is considered "legally binding" -- may not be quite so "legally binding" if/when properly explained to a proper jury in light of extenuating (or just plain other) circumstances!
So kindly think of these issues prior to making all-encompasing proposals as to what you think should be "legally binding" or not.
I comprehend that you are just trying to solve a problem; I comprehend and empathize; but the problem might be a bit greater than you think, and there might be one if not serveral unexplored partial/better (since no one solution, legal or otherwise, will be all-encompassing) solutions -- because the problem is so large in scope -- but all of these issues must be considered in parallel -- or errors, present or future will occur...
Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#159This seems to introduce levels of artifacts that many artists would find unacceptable: https://twitter.com/sini4ka111/status/1748378223291912567 The rumblings I'm hearing are that this a) barely works with last-gen training processes b) does not work at all with more modern training processes (GPT-4V, LLaVA, even BLIP2 labelling [1]) and c) would not be especially challenging to mitigate against even should it become…
I can’t really see any difference in those images on the Twitter example when viewing it on mobile
Re: Nightshade: An offensive tool for artists against AI art generators
#160This seems to introduce levels of artifacts that many artists would find unacceptable: https://twitter.com/sini4ka111/status/1748378223291912567 The rumblings I'm hearing are that this a) barely works with last-gen training processes b) does not work at all with more modern training processes (GPT-4V, LLaVA, even BLIP2 labelling [1]) and c) would not be especially challenging to mitigate against even should it become…
I can’t really see any difference in those images on the Twitter example when viewing it on mobile