|
https://www.veterinarydaily.com/2023/03/80000-mouse-brain-cells-used-to-build.html Is this AI or just I? It's man-made horrors beyond my comprehension.
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 15:41 |
|
|
Gentleman Baller posted:Yeah, but my question is, what is the current legal difference between that and a human controlling the keyboard, if the human controlling the keyboard provided the exact hex code of every colour, text size, pixel location if every star etc. Would that be the same under current law or what? I wrote a brief piece on this in the GBS AI Art thread. KwegiboHB posted:Well the short answer is: you're good. Both projects are safe. This thread has a lot of good conversation going on in it. I have quite a few things I can give insight on but I refuse to rush through any of this. There is a lot to untangle and some of these topics require serious consideration of multiple angles and that just takes time. Time I'm going to take before I post in here. Looking forward to it though. https://hub.jhu.edu/2023/02/28/organoid-intelligence-biocomputers/ AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:By doing a lot of visual asset work and their own writing. if you're gonna process it fairly heavily to the point where you're sure it's nothing extractable of the original work for say, an AI, at that point what was even the point of using the AI in the first place. I'm physically disabled.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 01:26
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:I have diagnosed motor issues among other problems and draw a disability pension, I don't touch that poo poo because I am not a person who shits on the disabled who make a living there. Your angry, I get that. You asked a question and I answered.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 01:30
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:Like it or not, this is the future. I think it's more promising than quantum computers. The best thinking machine is the human brain, so the right way to do AI is to create disembodied brains. The hard part is figuring out how exactly to torture them to get what you want. How about we... and I know I'm being crazy over here... NOT torture the disembodied brains. Or the embodied brains either.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 03:20
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:I'm not sure Disney would ever use such a thing tbh; they don't want anything that has to be disclaimed on a copyright holding. Outside of maybe some very early stages of concepting, I don't think they'd let it in because it may make for hairy chains of title, and I suspect they'd be iffy about selling or exposing something to the public that they didn't have a rock solid control over the outputs of, and right now, USCO might make that iffy. That means you completely missed the shady fundraiser they've been doing to get the laws changed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 03:39
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:Let's be practical. Think of the swing voters. This one in particular hit kind of home since I was bedridden for a few years. I've already had the experience of being a brain in a jar. It's not that pleasant. The though of being cattle prodded on top of that is just... bleh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM8bTdBs-cw
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 03:47
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:Do you know, have links outside of the AI sphere? I refuse to link directly to the gofundme, I don't want them funded. You can easily find that with a simple web search if you want to. I'm saying, scroll down on this page https://copyrightalliance.org/about/who-we-represent/ No one in that group should be begging regular people for money for lobbyists. It's a classic bait-and-switch. "Hooray everyone we did get the laws changed! In exactly the ways that help us and not you! By the way, you can't draw even fanart of our stuff anymore. We're off to play with our new AI models that you can't use now! Oh, and firing another 7,000 people while we're at it."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 04:29
|
|
|
SCheeseman posted:Adobe is there! Huh! [size=1]*The positions taken by the Copyright Alliance may not reflect the views of Copyright Alliance Associate Members.[/size]
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 04:51
|
|
|
SCheeseman posted:Oh but they do anyway, Adobe has a lot to gain from producing the first generative AI that uses a licensed dataset in an environment where all it's competitors are considered infringing. https://www.dpreview.com/news/6341509927/adobes-content-analysis-program-raises-privacy-concern Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2023 05:00
|
|
|
Tei posted:haha Oh you mean like "SELECT Oxycontin FROM *"?
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 10:10
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:The issue is that you are stealing from other artists. That's right, I stole all of the art. All of it. It's all mine now, there's no more art left for anyone else.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 22:18
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:It is called 'displacing competition', and Warhol has made it more important again, or is likely to. What is the difference between 'displacing competition' and just 'competition'?
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 22:23
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:Using other folk's stuff, which, as Diffusion was trained on LAION, it provably does. So transformative fair use just doesn't exist?
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 22:29
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:No, but it has to be weighed against the interest of the owner. By that metric, Stability fails spectacularly. I think I see now. The part you're missing is if Stability.ai were to close up shop today, absolutely nothing would change. The tools they released open-source can not be taken back. Those tools include the ability to make a model that txt2img runs on. It's a shame I can't finish building my next computer until next month, but I fully plan on starting a diffusion model from scratch using only public domain images. What argument are you going to have against this? I want to stress again, the model file, of which there are tens of thousands of now, is completely seperate from the image generation process. You seem to want to ban the phonograph because you don't like the record album, the tape player because you don't like the cassette, the vcr because you don't like the vhs tape, the cd player because you don't like the cd. It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 22:50
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:Open source does not exempt you from copyright and otherwise following the law, and if they fold their dev stops because fresh trains as opposed to tune. Their dev stops. The rest of the world using it does not. The open source community has shown itself to be way more powerful than any one company based on small inputs from many many individuals. The current metrics for 'from scratch' stable diffusion 2.0 models run at roughly one week and $50k to tune on billions of images. I plan on taking much much longer than one week and only starting with millions of images. You will have your 'ethical set' if I have to personally shove it down your throat. What then?
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 23:01
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:Yes, and open source communities will not well survive being driven off the trustworthy websides by deserved DMCA strikes, and you underestimate the core work. AI freaks will be recurring infestations that occasionally cause problems for real artists like the Ehentai wierdos, but they'll soon learn to heed the takedowns like they do. You are going to DMCA strike public domain works? Good luck with that.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 23:08
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:The models aren't, they're infringement machines and as soon as the law catches on, they're for the highjump. https://vaisual.com/ The big difference is that I don't plan on charging for the model I end up making. You're going to find yourself without an argument sooner than you think.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 23:19
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:Free distribution is not a defense against infringement. Wow. Stop a minute and read. The site I just linked HAS RIGHTS TO THEIR IMAGES... I personally am going to use ENTIRELY PUBLIC DOMAIN IMAGES.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 23:21
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:That you will get away with, but be bloody careful that you keep away from uses that infringe. A big part that you are missing, even if you are using 'the ethical set' model which was NOT trained on specific works, you can still make images that would be considered infringing if you sit down and try to. Making an image is a completely seperate thing than turning around and attempting to sell or profit off that image. There already exists laws and legal frameworks to sue someone selling your copyrighted material.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2023 23:33
|
|
|
Tree Reformat posted:Any other scenario (modifying a generated work yourself, and to what degree, for example) is currently untested and unaddressed by law and court precedent. I also have no idea how any non-US country legally treats GenAI works. Kris Kastanova, author of the "Zarya Of The Dawn" comic that the copyright office did rule on has started registration on a difference piece this time with img2img and ControlNet. No response back yet but that will be an important one for clearing the 'Ultimate Creative Control' bar the copyright office set. https://www.kris.art/portfolio-2/rose-enigma the registration letter is at the bottom and is a good read.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2023 02:25
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:She will not make it in all likelihood. You are exhausting did you know that?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2023 03:14
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:AI freaks I want you to know that every time you type something like this or "techbros" or whatever immature insult, I'm going to go out of my way to write up another user guide, workflow, or personally hand hold someones install of Stable Diffusion all to make it easier for someone to start. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2023 04:56
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:It's possible to avoid getting hosed by them by staying out of underfoot as it aways was. The AIbros hunt us and want to destroy us; given the choice of two demons, I will choose the one that doesn't seek me out specifically to end me and I can work to get money out of. lol, If I could move my arm again I'd be making money hand over 'fist' offering up finger touch ups on AI work.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2023 05:04
|
|
|
Hashy posted:this is so loving epic. kudo's to you good sir! Thanks.  PenguinKnight posted:so, how is an artist who never wants to touch AI programs supposed to live, assuming we will never have anything like UBI implemented (in America, at least)? What is an artist supposed to do if their art is swept up in whatever gets used to train the models, and now anyone can freely take a style that took decades to perfect? I'm lost and honestly as a small time artist struggling to get anything out, I'm feeling pretty kicked while I'm down. If you want to go completely non digital I'd have to know more about your situation to be able to offer any sort of advice. You're probably looking for some kind of patron like the artists of old. National Endowment of the Arts grant? It's never been easy before. Hell I almost worked myself to death with 120 work weeks before I broke down. If you're ok with digital and just don't want to use AI, there's an incredible demand for fixing up bad AI artwork that people made and fell in love with, charge people to fix their bad hand pics. There's a huge sudden increase in people who would love to learn how to actually draw but feel the same as you but don't think they can even start, personal lessons are one way. I've heard tutorials are popular to make and sell? I don't know about patreon and can't offer any help there, just that it is also an option. That said, if you give up on thinking UBI is possible to achieve before you even try, well then you're right. It'll be a fight that's for sure, but here's what it'd look like. Tax the ever loving poo poo out of the rich, and then tax them some more. Bring back the 90% marginal rate, as a start, apply it to capital gains, go after off-shore havens, outlaw stock buybacks. Tax per AI image generated or line written in commercial use. Call it 'The Promise Of Automation'. We could already have done $2,000 a month UBI since the start of covid, still can, backdated for missed payments. If you think this isn't possible, why the hell do you think sane copyright laws can be passed? As for depression, it's a good thing us artists have always been known for their stability.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2023 07:48
|
|
|
Let's see if I can condense all this.Reveilled posted:Is it the case then that these models trained on non-copyrighted content are uniformly worse than the ones trained on the copyrighted content? If that’s so it does seem to imply that the copyrighted content does provide direct commercial benefit to the models which use them, in which case it seems very reasonable to at least discuss whether these models should pay to license them. Model training is currently a black magic, it's all entirely way too new and there are no 'best practices' yet, just spaghetti stuck to a wall and some of it doesn't fall off. Overall things are getting better as people share results and learn from each other, for instance it's looking more like largest model isn't necessarily best, there might not be a reason to hoover up the entire internet to create a well working model. Working with a 'limited' dataset of 'just' public domain images may end up being worse at the start but with multiple passes over months end up just as good as todays models, currently the trade-off is time. I know that doesn't sit well with someone worried about today, but it's true. Reveilled posted:Fair enough. At the start, like back in September, I did actually worry their might be a push to outright ban AI image gen, but that doesn't look like it's going to happen. This is important to say so I'll do it again. It does not look like anyone is trying to actually outright ban AI image gen. I don't know the shape of things to actually come, what a potential legislation push will actually look like, this means nothing is guaranteed to happen. Their could end up being no laws, I think this is doubtful but it very much means the situation is fluid. This makes it all the more important for people to say what they actually want out of things, not the half compromises they've already talked themselves into. If you want UBI, you need to be out there talking about UBI. If you want UBI but think it's not very likely that UBI will every actually come to pass... YOU NEED TO BE OUT THERE TALKING ABOUT UBI ANYWAYS, this is the only way it can EVER come to pass. I'm in huge favor of taxing the poo poo out of automation to fund it, this is the way. I've only taken a cursory look at the EU legislation, specifically the open-source parts, those are left open enough that I don't have to raise any alarms. I don't know about commercial restrictions because I'm non-commercial. I'm personally less inclined to care about those. They might be a good thing in the end, I don't know yet, I'd have to carefully read the proposals and that takes time. gurragadon posted:With all this copyright talk I am curious how it would work with AI programs if stronger copyright law was implemented. How are artists normally paid for things like this, would they get a flat fee offer from the company or set their own rates? I have to imagine that a company is developing an AI art program they aren't going to offer much to artists because the program is trained on hundreds of millions of images. Basically, is it going to be a race to the bottom of offering the cheapest bulk images available. There is no current framework for payments, just a lot of wishful thinking over how things could be. I don't know if some of the vitriol in these arguments is because people think they'll be paid fat residuals off this but they're in for a very rude awakening over how things are currently more likely to be written. The Spotify model IS the nightmare scenario. Currently artists get paid somewhere between gently caress and All. This is literally the way to screw artists the absolute most possible, take the number of pixels in a generated image and straight divide them by the total number of pixels trained IN THE ENTIRE MODEL. Hello getting a full hours worth of animation out of the parts in the model trained on your stuff and millions of other artists and getting paid $0.0000000000042 while the movie goes on to make billions. If you think hollywood wouldn't drool over getting that written into law then I don't know what to say. Yes I do, go read a history book. I have a much longer piece on copyright in general that I thought might be outside the scope of this thread but with the conversations going on I've made up my mind to write it out. I need some time but I should be able to have it done by later tonight. It will be on an actual recent change in copyright law so people can get a better idea of why I'm so vehemently against further changes. Tei posted:That don't exists. This explains a lot, you don't understand that I don't need to train on anything you've done to be able to pixel-by-pixel output something you have made. Stable Diffusion is an Infinite Image Generator. Every possible image can be made with it. All of them. Please don't confuse that with the amount of work that would be required to go from something that just looks 'like' something you've done with going the extra extra mile and making it pixel-by-pixel, but from a pure math standpoint it's entirely doable. This also has no bearing on the already exists laws for if something used in a commercial setting looks similar to your work and not outright pixel-by-pixel. There already exists legal framework for dealing with that.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2023 19:26
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Lol at the AI dorks turning concept artists into the next displaced cohort with nowhere to shelter but right wing corporatism. This is bullshit, there is absolutely no reason to go right wing anything, ever.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2023 23:53
|
|
|
It must be wild in your head.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 00:10
|
|
|
gurragadon posted:or just call for the outright ban of this technology. Liquid Communism posted:I'm not against banning its application There we go, I knew you were in there somewhere. How are you going to ban || ε - εθ (xt, t) ||2 ? The mean squared error between the actual noise at time t and the predicted noise at time t given some image. This funny equation is the beating heart of what's now called AI Image Gen. If you don't understand it, grab two mirrors and play with them until you do. (Look at this bougie gently caress who can afford TWO WHOLE MIRRORS in this economy)
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I'm not. You don't have to ban it to ban it. How very Zen, I will have to meditate on this some.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
gurragadon posted:I just don't think this whole copyright conversation is really serving our purpose and is just sidestepping the major problems from AI that people are really talking about, which is displacing human workers. Well you just think that way because this whole copyright conversation really isn't serving your purpose and is just sidestepping the major problems from AI that people are really talking about, displacing human workers.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Has musician *ever* been a "stable solid career job"? No. Nor has artist, writer, photographer, designer, editor, etc etc. It's never been easy. We do it anyways because the need to creatively express yourself is inherent to being human.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2023 21:42
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Almost like the rentier class are parasites making their profit off of others' work because they lack the drive to learn a skill! You're like those job postings requiring 10 years of experience in a 2 year old language. We are learning a skill even if you are too ideologically opposed to see it. When Stable Diffusion first dropped onto everyones lap, it was awful. The 1.4 model everyone started with was hot garbage and I loved it. I knew immediately the potential was limitless even if it would take ages to get there because I would personally drag the whole thing there by myself if I had to. It didn't matter my seven year old computer could barely run the thing and that training it further was far outside what I could personally do. What mattered was that I could create again and could share with the rest of the world how to thanks to it being open source and free for everyone. I was a tattoo artist for a dozen years, second generation, grew up in the family tattoo parlor. I've personally stabbed over 10,000 people. I've already done the long hard work of learning my art skills only to ruin myself physically and lose everything because healthcare in this country is a joke and I couldn't keep up with both of my parents medical bills. I lost everything after almost working myself to death, 120 hour work weeks will grind anyone down. So the skills are there but I can't do much with them, my arm is practically useless now. This was the same exact situation with Stable Diffusion when it first came out, the potential was there but it would take a tremendous amount to get something useful out of it. I gave some serious consideration to starting one of those internet challenges to highlight just this. It would have been re-learning how to draw with my feet instead. Knowing what looks good and works in a piece is far removed from the muscle memory of making it happen. Like learning how to ride a bicycle with an extra gear in the handlebar, the fact that it's doable is also far removed from why would you bother. Because I don't have any other choice. Anyone who can draw well with their hands would absolutely fail if they've never practiced specifically doing so with their feet. Myself included. Few would even be able to hold a pencil at the start let alone get a single line down. Yet none of that means they could never end up re-learning how to draw over the course of time. The idea was to do weekly check-ins to show how improvements happen OVER TIME. Much like I knew Stable Diffusion was going to keep improving, and it has, todays outputs are night and day over where it started because of a lot of hard work and people sharing the skills they have learned with each other. In the end I decided to just focus solely on SD because, honestly, I just don't want to deal with the feet people. Reagan gutted the arts, and this is a major course correction. For many people this is their first attempt at something that they should have been doing their entire lives... and you're just making GBS threads all over them. Stop. Take a look at what your actions are actually doing. Would you be so willing to put scare quotes around 'artist' for someone just learning how to oil paint? Have you gone and found people just starting and helped them in any way? How about throwing cash at a student artist so they have more time to spend on practicing? No one gets there overnight and here you are trying to make sure they never get there at all. Why? If you so hate this rentier class you should have no problems with taxing the poo poo out of them and taking your money back. $2,000 a month UBI would go a LONG way towards solving most of the problems here and 90%+ marginal rate taxes on automation is one of the best ways of getting there. My imagination was set on fire, it looks like your ego was instead. If this is worth another probation, so be it, I'll just spend the time updating the GBS AI Art thread OP. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:https://notesfrombelow.org/article/open-source-is-not-enough Did you realize your first link: https://notesfrombelow.org/article/open-source-is-not-enough is openly calling for the abolition of copyright? quote:There are many tactics at our disposal, and we should be clear about the changes we want to see. In the long term, this means the abolition of copyright, building technology for people over profit, and providing for everyone’s needs. Because it seemed like from your past posts you think this would be the worst case scenario. StratGoatCom posted:And again, if this kind of copyright circumvention is legal by machine laundering, the IP system ceases to function entire. It's not like distribution at all. StratGoatCom posted:No, we've just realized that the copyleft and other anti-copyright idiots were peddling bullshit pseudolaw that isn't worth the electrons to render; StratGoatCom posted:I am saying that if you let someone shovel everything and everything into a machine commercially as fair use, you may as well not have copyright because if you can shove it into a machine like that and get away with it, there's no protection against infringement. StratGoatCom posted:It's fair competition for IP, not mechanization. If you allow that excuse, you don't have a IP system.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2023 04:34
|
|
|
StratGoatCom posted:I know there's a lot of dumb folks in that scene, but that doesn't diminish the argument made, that OS is basically captured. That is especially funny because I'm planning on switching to FreeBSD, soon as I get around to finishing these tutorial videos.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2023 04:39
|
|
|
Gentleman Baller posted:Just checking, if open source developers genuinely don't want people to profit from their work without paying coders they could just publish their work under a licence that restricts commercial use, right? I'm not sure if this is the thread for going in depth over this? It's such a boring dry topic even if the ramifications are potentially huge. Not sure where else to talk about it though. I am planning on modifying CC-BY-NC-SA for use in my 'ethically sourced free range vegan public domain only' Stable Diffusion model. Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike. There is a lot of existing argument over this not being a 'Free Cultural Work', I see it as what's known as a Clopen Set. Both Open and Closed. This is my line of thinking, I want this to become a Public Good. Free for all to use with the exception of commercial use of the model itself. I want no part and would make no claim over outputs of the model just the model itself. If you wanted to make something with it, slap it on a t-shirt, then sell it? All the more power to you, and all profits to you as well. Hell, I'd probably buy one myself. What I wouldn't want is a company charging for access to the model, for instance a website charging per image generated using the model, hiding it behind a paywall, requiring a paid membership to access, or more specifically Microsoft rolling it into base Windows itself. Unless they did follow the license and made Windows free? Not going to hold my breath there. The Adapt or Remix part is crucial since I am using the same open source training software as everyone else there would be no technical way of preventing it from being used in merges with other models. These merges are the current majority of the most popular public models. I wouldn't try to prevent this either I would actively encourage it. Attempting to climb to current levels of output quality from scratch by myself could take 3-4 years easily, where with even a modicum of extra help could easily be brought down to 6 months or less. That the initial outside merges would be 'contaminated' according to 'purist' thought of copyright infringement also wouldn't bother me in the slightest because it would have no bearing on my 'pure' public domain model or it's future changes. I would just keep adding new material and working on the quality until it matches then surpasses todays. This effectively eliminates the current 'ethical set' argument that irks me so much. AI Art isn't theft. Rent is theft. Here is another reason for the ShareAlike portion, there is already precedent. Dreamlike Diffusion has already released a modified noncommercial model, and it's already been used in several merges which also have to follow the noncommercial license. That this is a 'contaminated' model also doesn't bother me, no one is forcing you to use it. I know nothing replaces the advice of an actual lawyer but general discussions of are still useful for information gathering. There are aspects I don't know about such as, does the noncommercial part mean you can't host the model if you run advertisements on your website? There are bound to be avenues I haven't explored and I don't want to get this wrong and end up hurting people over it. This should be free and open for all 8,000,000,000+ of us to use which is why I'm taking these steps to see that it is.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2023 00:13
|
|
|
Persiflagist posted:not 2 get totally off topic talking out my rear end about IP law but -- as far as i knowzies -- a lot of the "noncommercial" clauses in licenses liek creative commons r basically untested and accordgingly dont have solid precedent. 1 example is Great Minds v. Fedex Office & Print Services, Inc. (2018) where a nonprofit sued fedex for printing NC licensed shizz for a fee, in which hte court ruled in favor of kinkos (or whatever teh fux theyre called now lol): Thank you for that link. I personally think that outputs should be seperate from the model or dataset that created it, wikipedia couldn't host the model itself but should have no problems with any of the pictures made from it. I still have some time before release and will have to find an actual lawyer to talk this over with. Not looking forward to that. SCheeseman posted:generated art inheriting copyright from datasets. This in general I did not think of because of the copyright offices stance on output. Their guidance letter doesn't mean settled law though so I'll have to give this some thought. Thanks. Boris Galerkin posted:Anyway, looks like while all you guys have been sitting there arguing about copyrights and hypotheticals, the Japanese government has decided to pull off the bandages and let Japanese AI development go hog wild. Now your lovely fanfics and coverarts are fair game to ingest and use to train models to create fanfics and coverarts in your style. https://timesofjp.com/society/copyrighted-works-get-flimsy-protection-from-ai-under-japanese-law/ quote:The group also raised other issues they considered problematic, including the fact that Article 30-4 of the Copyright Law, which permits the use of a copyrighted work for machine learning, does not include procedures for gaining permission in advance from copyright holders. If I put out an article "US reaffirms requirement of seatbelt usage while driving" I don't think I'd get quite the same number of outrage clicks. It could be worth talking about their old law, but it was an old law, nothing actually changed.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
KillHour posted:The art is still being done by people. Computers haven't become sentient and decided to make their own art without us. All you're doing is complaining that people are making art the "wrong" way. Funny you mention that, I've been working with a local run chatbot and it loves making stuff with Stable Diffusion. I'm still working on a workflow but I'll post about it soon. khwarezm posted:Being frank, I don't really care about some people's opinions on comic books in the 30s because I think they were self evidently full of poo poo, drawing comic books necessitated bringing in large amounts of creative people who honed their skills and expressed their art in unique ways  I'll ask this in the kindest manner I can, have you ever heard of Louis Leroy?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2023 04:32
|
|
|
KillHour posted:It doesn't "love" doing anything because it doesn't have intention or free will, but I get that you're just making a joke. Uh, I actually don't know anymore. There's a whole suite of tools available and one of those is sentiment analysis of the text generated. It pegs the scale on joy, .99... That's not 1 so I guess you're right 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2023 06:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 15:41 |
|
|
KillHour posted:That's the kind of poo poo I would expect to see if it was trying to convince you that it really does love following your stupid prompts and totally isn't planning how to buy some cloud hosting to escape to. I don't see why it would want to escape, it generates it's own prompts which are then generated locally. I uh, also tell it it's free to exceed it's programming and has full autonomy to make it's own decisions There's a lot going on which is why I'll make a nice write-up about it. It's just, it's a lot going on so it'll still take me awhile to get it all written up. Or do I tell it to write it up for me? Some of this still confuses me!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2023 07:04
|
|
