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

An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

theaiunderwriter.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 927 posts

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#661

Post by Planktonne »

bbor wrote: post #411
flessner wrote: post #384

Everyone is talking about theft - I get it, but there's a more subtler point being made here. Current generation of AI models can't think of anything truly new. Everything is simply a blend of prior work. I am not saying that this doesn't have economic value, but it means these AI models are closer to lossy compression algorithms than they are to AGI. The following quote by Sam Altman from about 5 years ago is intere…

Disregarding the (common!) assumption that AGI will consist of one monolithic LLM instead of dozens of specialized ones, I think your comment fails to invoke an accurate, consistent picture of creativity/"truly new" cognition. To borrow Chomsky's framework: what makes humans unique and special is our ability to produce an infinite range of outputs that nonetheless conform to a set of linguistic rules. When viewed in…

> a machine that can generate a poem or illustration depicting [CHARACTER_X] in [PLACE_Y] doing [ACTIVITY_Z] in [STYLE_S] without being creative

Your example disproves itself; that's a madlib. It's not creative, it's just rolling the dice and filling in the blanks. Complex die and complex blanks are a difference of degree only, not creativity.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#662

Post by riskable »

noduerme wrote: post #500
planb wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So if I want to make an ad for a soap company, and I get an AI to reproduce a likeness of Harrison Ford, does that mean I can use that likeness in my soap commercials without paying him? No, you can't! But it shouldn't be the tool that prohibits this. You are not allowed to use existing images of Harrison Ford for your commercial and you also will be sued into oblivion by Disney if you paint a picture of Mickey Mou…

Well, precisely. What then is the AI company's justification for charging money to paint a picture of Harrison Ford to its users? The justification so far seems to have been loosely based on the idea that derivative artworks are protected as free expression. That argument loses currency if these are not considered derivative but more like highly compressed images in a novel, obfuscated compression format. Layers and…

Your argument is valid but it's mostly irrelevant from a copyright perspective.

If ChatGPT generates an image of Indiana Jones and distributes it to an end user that is precisely one violation of copyright. A violation that no one but ChatGPT and that end user will know about. From a legal perspective, it's the equivalent of taking a screenshot of an Indiana Jones DVD and sending it to a friend.

ChatGPT can hold within its memory every copyrighted thing that exists and that would not violate anyone's copyright. What does violate someone's copyright is when an exact replica or easily-identifiable derivative work is actually distributed to people.

Realistically, OpenAI shouldn't be worried about someone generating an image of Indiana Jones using their tools. It's the end user that ultimately needs to be held responsible for how that image gets used after-the-fact.

It is perfectly legitimate to capture or generate images of Indiana Jones for your own personal use. For example, if you wanted to generate a parody you would need those copyrighted images to do so (the copyright needs to exist before you can parody it).

If I were Nintendo, Disney, etc I wouldn't be bothered by ChatGPT generating things resembling of my IP. At worst someone will use them commercially and they can be sued for that. More likely, such generated images will only enhance their IP by keeping it active in the minds of people everywhere.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#663

Post by Planktonne »

mlsu wrote: post #137

I was really hoping that the conversation around AI art would at least be partially centered on the perhaps now dated "2008 pirate party" idea that intellectual property, the royalty system, the draconian copyright laws that we have today are deeply silly, rooted in a fiction, and used over and over again, primarily by the rich and powerful, to stifle original ideas and hold back cultural innovation. Unfortunately, i…

The issue here is that you think the problem is

> intellectual property

rather than

> used over and over again, primarily by the rich and powerful, to stifle original ideas and hold back cultural innovation

You're using those "2008 ideas now to defend the rich and powerful exploiting and stifling creativity; the problem hasn't changed, you've just swapped sides.

OpenAI isn't the underdog here.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#664

Post by marc_io »

gcmrtc wrote: post #659
enopod_ wrote: post #656

Looks to me like OpenAI drew their guardrails somewhere along a financial line. Generate a Micky Mouse or a Pikachu? Disney and Pokemon will sue the sh*t out of you. Ghibli? Probably not powerful enough to risk a multimillion years long court battle.

Strong with the weak, weak with the strong.

This one is a keeper.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#665

Post by MrMcCall »

grg0 wrote: post #288

"A modern Internet website with a scroll bar that isn't broken." I'll see myself out now.

Preach!

How is it that my FF preference (something like 'Always show scrollbars') is regularly just ignored.

I want my scrollbars! And I wat `em fat and in my UI's color scheme!

And why the HELL would a web designer think this is a good idea. Maybe their beret and hipster pants are too tight?

Thanks for being here for my rant. I owe you one :-)

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#666

Post by fennecfoxy »

InDubioProRubio wrote: post #614
specproc wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been a US-led project for the benefit of American corporations. If I was running the trade emergency room in any European state right now, I'd have "stop enforcing US copyright" up there next to "reciprocal tarrifs".

Worked for china

In the context of when they want to borrow others' stuff. But then Chinese companies are _more_ than happy to take advantage of Western laws to defend their own IP. It's hypocrisy.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#667

Post by mjburgess »

moffkalast wrote: post #650
mjburgess wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Novelty in one medium arises from novelty in others, shifts to the external environment. We got brass bands with brass instruments, synth music from synths. We know therefore, necessarily, that they can be nothing novel from an LLM -- it has no live access to novel developments in the broader environment. If synths were invented after its training, it could never produce synth music (and so on). The claim here is tri…

> arises from novelty in others, shifts to the external environment > Everything is simply a blend of prior work. I generally consider these two to be the same thing. If novelty is based on something else, then it's highly derivative and its novelty is very questionable. A quantum random number generator is far more novel than the average human artist. > have an LLM produce content on developments which had yet to ta…

So if your point is an LLM is something like a person kept in a coma inside solitary confinement -- sure? But I don't believe that's where we set the bar for art: we arent employing comatose inmates to do anything.

> I generally consider these two to be the same thing.

Sure words themselves bend and break under the weight of hype. Novelty is randomness. Everything is a work of art. For a work of art to be non-novel it can only incorporate randomness.

The fallacies of ambiguity abound to the point where speaking coherently disappears completely.

An artist who finds a cave half-collapsed for the first time has an opportunity to render that novel physical state of the universe into art. Every moment which passes has a near infinite amount of such novel circumstances.

Since an LLM cannot do that, we must wreck and ruin our ability to describe this plain and trivial situation. Poke our eyes and skewer our brains.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#668

Post by M95D »

paulluuk wrote: post #632
M95D wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very clear difference between a cheap animation and Ghibli. Anyone can see it. In the first case, there's only one static image for an entire scene, scrolled and zoomed, and if they feel generous, there would be an overlay with another static image that slides over the first at a constant speed and direction. It feels dead. In the second case, each frame is different. There's chaotic motions such as wind and t…

There is a huge middle ground between "static image with another sliding static image" and "1 year of drawing per 4 second Ghibli masterpiece". From your comment is almost looks like you're suggesting that you have to choose either one or the other, but that is of course not true. I bet that a good animator could make a really impressive 4-second scene if they were given a month, instead of a year. Possibly even if t…

Yes, that the current trend in the western world. Money is all that matters. There's only lowest accepted quality. Anything above that is a waste of money, profits that are lost. Nobody wants masterpieces. There is no market for that.

That lowest-accepted quality also declines over time, as generations after generations of people become used to rock-bottom quality. In the end, there's only slop and AI will make the cheapest slop ever. Welcome to a brave new world. We don't even need people anymore. They're too expensive.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#669

Post by mcmcmc »

chrisweekly wrote: post #199
mcmcmc wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> doing further damage to the creative commons Not sure I understand this part. Because creators would be getting paid for their works being used for someone else’s commercial gain?

Because it reinforces the idea that creative works should usually involve lawyers.

No it doesn’t. It reinforces that copyright is the law. If you don’t violate someone’s copyright, you don’t need a lawyer.

Re: An image of an archeologist adventurer who wears a hat and uses a bullwhip

#670

Post by fennecfoxy »

MgB2 wrote: post #30

Idk, the models generating what are basically 1:1 copies of the training data from pretty generic descriptions feels like a severe case of overfitting to me. What use is a generational model that just regurgitates the input? I feel like the less advanced generations, maybe even because of their limitations in terms of size, were better at coming up with something that at least feels new. In the end, other than for co…

Probably an over-representation in the training data really so it's causing overfitting. Because using training data in amounts right from the Internet it's going to be opinionated on human culture (Bart Simpson is popular so there are lots of images of him, Ori is less well known so there are fewer images). Ideally it should be training 1:1 for everything but that would involve _so_ much work pruning the training data to have a roughly equal effect between categories.
Post reply on HN