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

Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

thetechdeviant.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 336 posts

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#91

Post by Turing_Machine »

Overtonwindow wrote: post #62

That's just Reddit.. I don't think we should take any Reddit community. Seriously because it is run by Reddit mods who have proven countless times to be absolutely terrible at their job.

The problem with Reddit, SO, and pretty much any system with moderators is that a heavy-handed moderator can claim that he's "doing something", while a lenient moderator who only deletes genuinely egregious content looks like he's "not doing anything".

The same is true of other institutions, such as congresses and parliaments. Note that politicians run on the basis of what new laws they've gotten passed far more often than what laws they've blocked.

There's something to be said for the idea of a branch of government whose function is limited to repealing laws.

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#92

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

erk__ wrote: post #72
geraldwhen wrote: post #4

The hilarious irony is that the AI is quite possibly copying the authors older work if it was published on an image sharing site like Reddit or deviant art. Lawsuits need to destroy these models stolen from the public.

It is curious how different the sentiment is in this thread compared to the other thread currently on the front page regarding GitHub Copilot. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34274326

I think the big difference is that artists seem to freak out about AI because it will supposedly replace them, while programmers freak out because it's allegedly violating their copyrights. Obviously this is a generalization and not true in all cases, but those really are different concerns.

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#93

Post by jtbayly »

benjaminbachman wrote: post #2

The only real news here is that Reddit mods are power mad tyrants, which is nothing new at all. AI generated art has just given them newer, funnier ways to be in the wrong.

But in this case, the mods can't win. If they let AI art take over, HN will be condemning them for putting artists out of business. If they refuse to allow AI art, HN condemns them anyway.

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#94

Post by papichulo4 »

onion2k wrote: post #36
teekert wrote: post #18

What does it even matter how art is created? It's the same with banning ChatGPT from StackOverflow: Who cares and who notices? Art is either evoking some feeling or not and it's different for everybody. An answer on SO is either helpful or not. Who cares how it was written? ChatGPT can easily say something more helpful than me, stable diffusion can easily make something I'd rather have on my wall than Da Vinci's Mona…

If the goal of a community is to share work, critique each others efforts, and enjoy a hobby together, then someone coming along and pretending that they're doing it while they're not is obviously going to annoy people who are genuine. I see AI-generated art as being similar to taking performance enhancing drugs in sport or using something that's against the rules in motorsports. Outsiders don't really care because t…

Have you tried AI-generated art yet? It's more like protein powder, not steroids.

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#95

Post by numpad0 »

habibur wrote: post #37
DethNinja wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common misconception. AI is not copying anything. It is studying the images in a similar way that humans do. Entire size of the stable diffusion model is around 6gb, with pruning it goes down to 3gb. Training set is in terabytes. So it is common sense that no copying is done. I think artists need to be fair about AI, is there any artist that created their style without ever studying other artists? That is h…

Trained on 5 billion images to create a 6 GB model. Every image contributed no more than a few bits of information.

Billion and Giga is both 10^9, so about 6/5 or 1.2 byte or 10 bits, and somehow enough to regurgitate examples from training set[0]. Oh how convincing “AI is just learning as humans do” arguments are.

0: https://twitter.com/kortizart/status/1588915427018559490

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#96

Post by Manuel_D »

shlubbert wrote: post #46
dragontamer wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IRC Network administrators tend to enforce "official" names (owned by a particular group) vs "unofficial" names. For example, "#Ubuntu" is owned by the Ubuntu devs. While the unofficial ##Ubuntu is just fan owned. This already is a huge step forward compared to Reddit, where you aren't even sure which subreddits are owned by the corporation / official groups, or if they're "fan run". Are you sure /r/Ubuntu is a fan-r…

Which companies do actually own and moderate their own subreddits? I have always treated all of them as unofficial, even if there are employees of the company that post periodically.

Many streamers are root mods on their own subreddits. I doubt they do most of the moderation themselves, but they appoint and manage other mods. Most aren't companies, but some of the big ones have LLCs to handle their streaming businesses.

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#97

Post by Turing_Machine »

loriverkutya wrote: post #41
potatototoo99 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technicality was everything in painting before the advent of the photograph.

The impressionists wholeheartedly disagree with your comment.

The Impressionists came after photography, and in fact Impressionism was something of a reaction to its development. "Since we have the camera to do realistic images now, we should concentrate on other things.", more or less.

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#98

Post by Sebb767 »

danenania wrote: post #75
Sebb767 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An answer on SO is either helpful or not. Who cares how it was written? "Who cares if the diagnosis is done by a medical expert or someone pulling out random drugs they tried before? As long as I feel better immediately after taking them, who cares how they were prescribed?" The case on SO is clearly different, as ChatGPT might answer incorrectly or answer with something containing subtle bugs. There's also a good…

"ChatGPT might answer incorrectly or answer with something containing subtle bugs. There's also a good chance that you won't be immediately able to spot those bugs, as, if you were sufficiently knowledgeable in the topic yourself, you would have most likely not asked that question." Playing devil's advocate here, but this also clearly applies to human answers.

SOs answer quality was never perfect, but there are still a few differences:

- Humans actually try to answer the question at hand, whereas ChatGPT is only auto-completing text. This might lead to similar results in a lot of cases, but the goal of ChatGPT is not to produce correct SO answers.

- Related, humans will (usually) back off or correct answers if errors are pointed out to them. ChatGPT (at the moment) doesn't.

- Humans will (usually) not attempt to answer questions they don't feel like they are qualified to answer. ChatGPT will.

I'm not saying that SO is/was perfect as-is, but ChatGPT is - in my opinion - overall not likely to improve SOs quality as of now. Since it is currently banned on SO, it seems like this is not only my opinion.

Re: Artist banned, told to “find a different style”- AI-made art

#99

Post by Manuel_D »

tester457 wrote: post #78
DethNinja wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common misconception. AI is not copying anything. It is studying the images in a similar way that humans do. Entire size of the stable diffusion model is around 6gb, with pruning it goes down to 3gb. Training set is in terabytes. So it is common sense that no copying is done. I think artists need to be fair about AI, is there any artist that created their style without ever studying other artists? That is h…

Still, people did not consent to their art to be trained on. Just like how it is a bad idea to train github copilot on copyrighted code, or how the same company that made Stable Diffusion promised that they will not use copyrighted music for training (because they're scared of the music industry), copyrighted art should not be used on training sets without permission. This is going to cause a lawsuit somewhere down t…

Do people need to consent for other artists to use their work as references when painting? That seems pretty analogous to training an AI on a corpus of artwork.
Post reply on HN