Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

in.mashable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 90 posts

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#51

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

xscott wrote: post #46
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify, the 'caring about money' mentioned here refers to millions of humans genuinely worried about how they'll continue to survive and support their families in the society in which they live, as their profession is decimated over the course of a year or two, a fraction of the time it takes to learn a new one.

Once upon a time there were millions of people working the fields to make enough food. Nothing has been decimated in the last year or two, and I don't think anything will be in the next two either. But yeah, the world is changing, and some current careers won't be viable in a decade or two. I'm not sure we could find a point in the last century where that wasn't true.

To clarify, 'yeah, the world is changing' mentioned here refers to millions of humans genuinely worried about how they'll continue to survive and support their families in the society in which they live, as their profession is decimated (yes, decimated) over the course of a year or two (yes, a year or two), a fraction of the time it takes to learn a new one.

I'm reiterating this because I think it's important not to simply toss out a platitude and dismiss this staggering, unprecedented situation befalling millions of our fellow humans. If one's goal is to insulate themselves from their fellow humans, they might find it less important to do so.

Indeed, someone with such a goal could invent enough preconditions to caring for their fellow humans that they need never care! Preconditions like 'I don't care about you because I don't think your situation is changing fast enough' or 'I don't care about you because you value money while living in a capitalist society'. Dust hands off, problem solved, goal achieved, am I right?

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#52

Post by xscott »

fithisux wrote: post #38
xscott wrote: post #15

I'll care a little more about the creatives' arguments when they start paying royalties to every drawing, painting, illustration, tv show, or movie they've ever seen. Until then, it's just a cash grab. No individual is all that creative, and anyone accomplished is standing on the shoulders of past giants to get there. The "what will we do for jobs argument?!?" would've applied to stage actors when movies came out a c…

You seem to mix a lot. The first part is pseudo-argument. You compare apples and oranges. You treat education and massive steal of IP the same. The second part seems to be a religious rehash of "The world keeps getting better as technology advances" this is not something guaranteed to continue and the world is not getting better from everyone. You seem to "overfit". The third part does not guarantee a sustainable inc…

IP is a fiction we created to encourage artists to create. Arguably it was a trade off where we encourage producers of creative works by giving them a limited monopoly for the benefit of the consumers. IP is a price we paid for the benefit of consumers. It's not an inalienable right.

As for sustainable incomes, I'm sure you heard the arguments about buggy-whip manufacturers going out of business when we got trains and cars. It really wasn't that much of a tragedy in the big picture of things.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#53

Post by xscott »

photoGrant wrote: post #45
xscott wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, now that you've clarified: My take was correct, right? Your first instinct was to attack my character instead of discussing the topic, and you knew you had to be sneaky about it to not obviously break the rules. Your empathy isn't showing so clearly, and honestly I have more friendly discussions with ChatGPT than I am having with you. As for what artists care about - nobody is taking away their cameras or brushes…

I have no desire to be sneaky. Creatively pointed. Please report me if needed, I have no qualms exercising my ability to express humanity when someone attempts to dehumanise. Especially if I can do so in a way that opens up an avenue for reflection. Most just double down. Being silenced on this platform is an expected conclusion, not a concern.

So you're expressing humanity with your flowery (or sarcastic) language to call me ignorant, uncaring, and dehumanizing. I want to say that's hypocritical, but it really isn't. You are a pretty good reflection of humanity, and a fine example of why I don't care that some people will have to move on to survive. It's not like they (or you) were all that nice in the first place.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#54

Post by photoGrant »

xscott wrote: post #52
fithisux wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to mix a lot. The first part is pseudo-argument. You compare apples and oranges. You treat education and massive steal of IP the same. The second part seems to be a religious rehash of "The world keeps getting better as technology advances" this is not something guaranteed to continue and the world is not getting better from everyone. You seem to "overfit". The third part does not guarantee a sustainable inc…

IP is a fiction we created to encourage artists to create. Arguably it was a trade off where we encourage producers of creative works by giving them a limited monopoly for the benefit of the consumers. IP is a price we paid for the benefit of consumers. It's not an inalienable right. As for sustainable incomes, I'm sure you heard the arguments about buggy-whip manufacturers going out of business when we got trains an…

Who is 'we' in your arguments. Master? And why do you think laws exist? It's to protect the rich from being burned at the stake by reality. Societal agreements go both ways. You think it's to feign appeasement to the little piggie complaints and get them back to growing for your market day? You continue to dehumanise 'them' -- your neighbour into nothing more than an idiot who takes from your bottom line. Humans aren't a one way street to a compute problem, friend.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#55

Post by csnover »

skepticATX wrote: post #21
xscott wrote: post #15

I'll care a little more about the creatives' arguments when they start paying royalties to every drawing, painting, illustration, tv show, or movie they've ever seen. Until then, it's just a cash grab. No individual is all that creative, and anyone accomplished is standing on the shoulders of past giants to get there. The "what will we do for jobs argument?!?" would've applied to stage actors when movies came out a c…

We don't have to treat humans and machines the same. Even if it were true that these models learn exactly like humans (which is patently false), we can still differentiate between the two. Society is built by and for humans. If we want to empower humans over machines, that seems perfectly acceptable.

> Society is built by and for humans.

These machines are also built by and for humans.

> If we want to empower humans over machines, that seems perfectly acceptable.

But that’s not what’s happening here. This is a faction of humans fighting to maintain their power and control over how the rest of humanity is allowed to produce artistic works.

Creatives who fight against generative AI are trying to empower themselves over everyone else. Corporations who develop closed-source AI like OpenAI are also trying to empower themselves over everyone else. The main problem in both cases is the way a select few are trying to amass power for themselves.

Generative AI has fundamentally shifted the scope of what it means to be creative, and prohibiting it from being trained on the collective works of humanity doesn’t empower humans over machines. It empowers some humans at the expense of other humans. Big AI companies acting exploitatively and trying to figure out how to build their own moats so only they are allowed to control the technology does the same thing, so this shouldn’t be allowed to happen either.

This is not the first time, nor is it likely to be the last, that a major disruption happened in creative arts due to technology. The invention of the phonograph decimated live musicians. Hundreds of thousands of jobs in cinemas, radio stations, and restaurants were permanently lost[0], but I don’t think anyone today would argue that we’d be better off if record labels hadn’t been allowed to reproduce the works of other artists.

Instead of retreading the same tired arguments about generative AI itself, let’s instead focus on how to ensure creatives can adapt and not end up homeless and penniless, and on how to ensure a few giant tech companies don’t monopolise an otherwise democratising technology. That, more than anything, will ensure that we are empowering humans over machines.

[0] https://slate.com/transcripts/RS94QUlwS0ZsSnZnakE4UVUzR2loUV...

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#56

Post by Springtime »

caesil wrote: post #7
photoGrant wrote: post #2

I asked this question a few days ago and the responses, arrogance and ignorance was astounding. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39406709 I promise, if I'm here asking this week, there's millions more that will be asking next week. Carving out the labour market has more consequences than increasing productivity. It destroys culture, society and a will to live. Wise up. edit: And before the inevitable responses be…

Thank you! This is exactly why we need to BAN weaving machines. The will to live is sustained by the work of the skilled artisans who create clothing by hand with looms. "But I don't want to pay 500 dollars for a t-shirt", you say. What astounding arrogance! Stop destroying culture and accept that we need to protect this valuable craft from technology that threatens to steamroll it.

Comments like these are kind of straw man rebuttals imo. There have been similar arguments such as 'electronic music didn't destroy musicianship', 'photography didn't destroy art', etc.

They skirt around the important details, in that in all those analogies the entire process/field wasn't replaced/impacted by automation, only facets. Advanced generative NNs aren't merely dumb automated tools that still require human craftmanship but rather, at a baseline, take the place of the humans in virtually all respects of design, implementation and continually synthesizing based on others' work.

The analogy presented in your post doesn't account for the designers still involved with the process, the real-world practicalities that involve humans of getting clothing made even with all the automation available. Generative AI doesn't have this goal; it's increasingly allowing for replacement of all humans and processes involved, besides the one wishing upon a genie lamp.

Now one can of course apply their own craftsmanship to such outputs if desired and there are examples of this from existing artists/writers where it fits more like a tool into a workflow (and such analogies would actually apply here), however as we can already observe the vast majority of uses don't and there is still at a minimum a usable result, as the tech advances.

There are also parallels one commonly reads drawn to how humans operate: if a human studied others' artwork then they too would be able to synthesize results. However no human has memory and mind's eye recall like that of advanced NNs, which is plainly observable from the output of human history. It's an unfair comparison. The goal of generative models is to be superhuman yet only human arguments are being applied.

I think there are a bunch of positives and negatives to this but it's hard not to see the impact it will have particularly on human motivation and societal expectations, regardless of financial incentives, apart from the general shut-up-and-take-it attitude one sees. There are some pretty impactful legitimate concerns to be had that warrant thoughtful discussion.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#57

Post by xscott »

chrisknyfe wrote: post #35
caesil wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you! This is exactly why we need to BAN weaving machines. The will to live is sustained by the work of the skilled artisans who create clothing by hand with looms. "But I don't want to pay 500 dollars for a t-shirt", you say. What astounding arrogance! Stop destroying culture and accept that we need to protect this valuable craft from technology that threatens to steamroll it.

The luddites didn't destroy the power looms because they were some kind of handcrafting purists - they destroyed the machines because they took away ownership of the means of production from individual craftsmen to big businesses. The problem wasn't the machine, it was the factory and its owner.

I'm guessing they were worried about their source of income, and not Marxist philosophy that came about 100 years later. However my history isn't so hot, and maybe Ned was a philosopher in addition to a weaver, and maybe Karl should've paid royalties to his estate for stealing those ideas. :-)

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#58

Post by photoGrant »

xscott wrote: post #53
photoGrant wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no desire to be sneaky. Creatively pointed. Please report me if needed, I have no qualms exercising my ability to express humanity when someone attempts to dehumanise. Especially if I can do so in a way that opens up an avenue for reflection. Most just double down. Being silenced on this platform is an expected conclusion, not a concern.

So you're expressing humanity with your flowery (or sarcastic) language to call me ignorant, uncaring, and dehumanizing. I want to say that's hypocritical, but it really isn't. You are a pretty good reflection of humanity, and a fine example of why I don't care that some people will have to move on to survive. It's not like they (or you) were all that nice in the first place.

Your beliefs and words are stripping me of my talents, livelihood, journey, meaning, finances and goals and you're upset that I call it ignorant, uncaring and dehumanizing. Hypocritical or not, these are not my attempts at creatively insulting you. They're the smallest of reality checks you need and I have absolutely no delusion to believe you'll ever think otherwise. How YOU became a victim in this discussion lends to nothing beyond an eye roll. You still haven't uttered a word of empathy for anything that doesn't fit your position. History will appreciate these discussions and who fought for what exactly.

Now tech thinks its an expert on philosophy, history and art. Hubris is something folks should lead with more often in place of ego.

edit: It'd be real easy to conflate my response to dehumanising each other with the larger arguments at play. Continue to hunt for your 'gotchas'

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#59

Post by xscott »

photoGrant wrote: post #54
xscott wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IP is a fiction we created to encourage artists to create. Arguably it was a trade off where we encourage producers of creative works by giving them a limited monopoly for the benefit of the consumers. IP is a price we paid for the benefit of consumers. It's not an inalienable right. As for sustainable incomes, I'm sure you heard the arguments about buggy-whip manufacturers going out of business when we got trains an…

Who is 'we' in your arguments. Master? And why do you think laws exist? It's to protect the rich from being burned at the stake by reality. Societal agreements go both ways. You think it's to feign appeasement to the little piggie complaints and get them back to growing for your market day? You continue to dehumanise 'them' -- your neighbour into nothing more than an idiot who takes from your bottom line. Humans aren…

I'm going to ignore everything that sounds too weird to address. Philosophy major? Drinking on a Tuesday?

As for laws, we're almost in agreement. People want to argue about rights, but it seems to me the rules are a lot more about control. I could ramble on quite a bit about corruption at every level from local police to federal politicians. ... to copyright enforcement.

However, most of the rules were made before the current batch of super rich people got super rich, so there's something oversimplified in thinking it's just about protecting wealth.

My bottom line? Compute problem? Whatever. I think the rest is just more weirdness I can't make sense of.

Re: What Was Sora Trained On? Creatives Demand Answers

#60

Post by xscott »

photoGrant wrote: post #58
xscott wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're expressing humanity with your flowery (or sarcastic) language to call me ignorant, uncaring, and dehumanizing. I want to say that's hypocritical, but it really isn't. You are a pretty good reflection of humanity, and a fine example of why I don't care that some people will have to move on to survive. It's not like they (or you) were all that nice in the first place.

Your beliefs and words are stripping me of my talents, livelihood, journey, meaning, finances and goals and you're upset that I call it ignorant, uncaring and dehumanizing. Hypocritical or not, these are not my attempts at creatively insulting you. They're the smallest of reality checks you need and I have absolutely no delusion to believe you'll ever think otherwise. How YOU became a victim in this discussion lends…

Dude, I'd totally love to be paid lots of money to work on my pet projects. Just think of the beauty I could bring in to the world. My talents, livelihood, journey and so on just can't find a market though.
Post reply on HN