624

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/3613920

https://archive.ph/tR7s6

Get fuuuuuuuuuuuuuucked

“This isn’t going to stop,” Allen told the New York Times. “Art is dead, dude. It’s over. A.I. won. Humans lost.”

"But I still want to get paid for it."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] stephen01king@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 months ago

Bro, it's you who said type the same sentence. Why are you saying the wrong things and then try to change your claims later?

The problem is that you couldn't be bothered to try and say the correct thing, and then have the gall to blame other people for your own mistake.

And in what kind of context does using the same seed even makes sense? Do people determine the seed first before creating their prompt? This is a genuine question, btw. I've always thought that people generally use a random seed when generating an image until they find one they like, then use that seed to modify the prompt to fine tune it.

[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

In the context that I’m explaining that the thing is deterministic. Do you disagree? Because that was my point. Diffusion models are deterministic.

[-] stephen01king@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That's as much deterministic as tracing someone's artwork, really.

If you have to use a different creation process than how someone would normally create the artwork, whether legitimate or using AI, then it's not really a criticism of that method in the first place.

I was seriously thinking you found a way to get similar enough results to another person's AI output just from knowing the prompt. That would actually prove that AI artwork require zero effort to reproduce.

Edit: To expand on that 1st prargrpah, yes, AI is deterministic as much as a drawing tablet and app is deterministic, that is if you copy exactly what another person does using the tool, it will produce the same result.

[-] hperrin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You might be able to copy one stroke of a pen exactly, but the thousands or tens of thousands of strokes it takes to paint a painting? Like, yeah, you can copy a painting “close enough”, but it’s not exactly the same, because paint isn’t deterministic.

As far as making a “close enough” copy that isn’t exactly the same with AI, you can just use any image as the input image and set the denoising strength to like .1. Then you’ll get basically the same image but it’ll have a different checksum. So if you wanna steal art, AI makes it way easier.

There’s not really any human creativity in this process, or even using your own prompts, which is the whole point behind the copyright office denying this guy’s copyright claim. Maybe you could copyright your prompt, if it’s detailed enough.

this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
624 points (95.9% liked)

Not The Onion

12543 readers
842 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS