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

731–740 of 927 posts

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

#731

Post by Lerc »

vkou wrote: post #419
Lerc wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if this is a problem with overfitting. I'm ok with the model knowing what Indiana Jones or the Predator looks like with well remembered details, it just seems that it's generating images from that knowledge in cases where that isn't appropriate. I wonder if it's a fine tuning issue where people have overly provided archetypes of the thing that they were training towards. That would be the fastest way for…

> I'm ok with the model knowing what Indiana Jones or the Predator looks like with well remembered details, ClosedAI doesn't seem to be OK with it, because they are explicitly censoring characters of more popular IPs. Presumably as a fig leaf against accusations of theft.

There is a difference between knowing what something looks like and generating an image of that thing.

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

#732

Post by singleshot_ »

Avicebron wrote: post #402
singleshot_ wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s more reasonable to say that the idea of intellectual property is challenging for nonlawyers because of the difficulty in understanding ownership not as one thing, but as a bundle of various elements of control, exclusion, obligation, or entitlement, even some of which spring into existence out of nowhere. In other words, the challenge is not to understand “what exactly is being owned,” and instead, to understand…

> what exactly being owned is. Thank you, this is beautifully put and very astute. Does a recipe, a culmination of a lifetime of experience, technique, trials, errors, and luck constitute a form of someone/thing's person-hood such that it can be Intellectual Property.

It depends. First I think we could make a distinction between not-intellectual-property and intellectual-property-with-no-protection but that doesn’t seem to be what you’re getting at.

Have you taken reasonable steps to keep it secret? It could be a trade secret and if course if you steal the recipe for KFC’s herbs and spices, you will be liable for civil damages for your misappropriation of their trade secret.

And if you describe a recipe in flowery prose, reminiscing about the aromas in grandmas kitchen, of course that prose is copyrightable.

Should you invent a special kind of chicken fry mix and give us a fanciful name, the recipes identifier if origin - its trademark -could be protectable.

But the fact that your chicken fry mix is made of corn starch and bread crumbs is a fact, like a phone book. Under most circumstances, not protectable.

ianyl tinla

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

#733

Post by TremendousJudge »

slidehero wrote: post #177
TremendousJudge wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the exception they are asking for (we can train on copyrighted material and the image produced is non-copyright infringing) is copyright infringing in the most basic sense. I'll prove it by induction: Imagine that I have a service where I "train" a model on a single image of Indiana Jones. Now you prompt it, and my model "generates" the same image. I sell you this service, and no money goes to the copyright holde…

>There's no reason why training on a billion images is any different You gloss over this as if it's a given. I don't agree. I think you're doing a different thing when you're sampling billions of things equallly.

That's why I said it's an argument by induction. Where's the limit for it to be different? 10 images? 100? 10000? Where does it stop being copyright infringement and why? Many people have paid heavy fines for much less. I don't think that "a billion images is so unfathomable compared to just one million that it truly is a difference in kind" is a valid response

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

#734

Post by SirMaster »

tastyface wrote: post #163
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…

A different way of looking at it: AI, by design, defaults to regurgitating the poppiest of pop culture content. Every whip-wielding archaeologist is now Harrison Ford. Every suave British spy is now Daniel Craig. With the power of AI, creativity is dead and buried.

But why Daniel Craig and not Pierce Brosnan?

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

#735

Post by davidhaymond »

nticompass wrote: post #714
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.

I thought Disney had the rights to publish Ghibli movies in the US.

They did, but the rights expired. GKIDS now has the theatrical and home video rights to Studio Ghibli films in the US (except for Grave of the Fireflies).

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

#736

Post by fluidcruft »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #507
9dev wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And… that is called overfitting. If you show the model values for y, but they are 2 in 99% of all cases, it’s likely going to yield 2 when asked about the value of y, even if the prompt didn’t specify or forbid 2 specifically.

I would argue this is just fitting.

If you take the perspective of all the possible responses to the request, then it is overfit because it only returns a non-generalized response.

But if you look at it from the perspective that there is only one example to learn, from it is maybe not over it.

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

#737

Post by briandear »

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.

Ghibli isn’t a character, but a style. You can’t copyright it.

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

#738

Post by bufferoverflow »

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.

Mickey Mouse (the original one) is out of copyright, as of last year, AFAIR.

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

#739

Post by jimmaswell »

csallen wrote: post #466
djoldman wrote: post #332

I don't condone or endorse breaking any laws. That said, trademark laws like life of the author + 95 years are absolutely absurd. The ONLY reason to have any law prohibiting unlicensed copying of intangible property is to incentivize the creation of intangible property. The reasoning being that if you don't allow people to exclude 3rd party copying, then the primary party will assumedly not receive compensation for t…

> The ONLY reason to have any law prohibiting unlicensed copying of intangible property is to incentivize the creation of intangible property. That was the original purpose. It has since been coopted by people and corporations whose incentives are to make as much money as possible by monopolizing valuable intangible "property" for as long as they can. And the chief strategic move these people have made is to convince…

We were close to your viewpoint being the popular one, but sadly many (most?) independent content creators are so overtaken by fear of AI that they've done a 180. The same people who learned by tracing references to sell fanart of a copyrighted franchise (not complaining, I spend thousands on such things) accuse AI of stealing when it glances at their own work. We're entering a new golden age of creative opportunity and they respond by switching sides to the philosophy of intellectual property championed by Disney and Oracle (except for those companies' ironic use of AI themselves..).

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

#740

Post by satvikpendem »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #45

Obviously a horrible hideous theft machine. One thing I would say, it's interesting to consider what would make this not so obviously bad. Like, we could ask AI to assess the physical attributes of the characters it generated. Then ask it to permute some of those attributes. Generate some random tweaks: ok but brawy, short, and a different descent. Do similarly on some clothing colors. Change the game. Hit the "rando…

> Obviously a horrible hideous theft machine [...] awful [...] horriffic

Ah, I thought I knew this account from somewhere. It seems surprisingly easy to figure out what account is commenting just based on the words used, as I've commented that only a few active people on this site seem to use such strong words as shown here.

Post reply on HN