Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I kinda feel like all I hear is anti AI talk. Meanwhile I'm in the camp of don't demonize tools, demonize what people do with the tools that's damaging.
As for art, I don't know how to ascribe value to art. The Mona Lisa exists. As do copies of it that are worthless. At what point will the original have no value by virtue of the quality of the copies? Will a molecularly identical copy made with a Star Trek replicator make the original worthless? Or will it always be valued as the original?
It isn't the "quality" of the piece that makes it more valuable, but the intrinsic quality of being the original. An exact, molecularly identical copy might make that messy, in that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them, but the true original is still the one with the value.
if the tool builders stole your work to create them, never compensated the creators, didn't even ask them - I suspect you'd feel differently. it's gross and people are like "well, it's just artists what do we need them for?"
copying isn't stealing, and modeling isn't even copying.
the greatest threat an artist faces isn't that someone might copy their work, but that no one will want to
I get it, you'll care when they get around to stealing your work.
copying isn't stealing.
oh, so you copied all the answers on your exams?
pfft. quit it kiddo, you're not equipped for this.
... He's not equipped? Your metaphor was nonsensical. Let's say he did copy his exam answers. Who lost their answers as a result?
Hence copying is not stealing.
Additionally, who was harmed by the copying in your example, and how?
being willfully ignorant of the harm being done to artists ability to pay their bills and you can't comprehend how it's theft.
damn that's dumb.
Who is dumber? The one calling people dumb, or the one unable to answer their questions? Don't use metaphors if you don't understand them or can't explain how they are valid.
you're happy to steal from people, you just want to call it something else to obfuscate your guilt.
I see this all the time. it's fucking dumb. you're either lying to yourself and deluded, or trying to lie to me.
So to answer your query: you, you're the dumb one.
Thanks for coming to my ted talk, gonna block you now because your inane messages aren't worth the electrons used to transmit their content.
You didn't answer the question. You dumb.
yep, kindly point out where I'm doxing, trolling, sealioning, being racist or toxic. I don't need to be friendly to someone being willfully ignorant, and none of this exchange has met those bars.
sealioning
toxicity
Sealioning is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential
but ok, if that's your bar for toxicity, shrug. report away.
I wouldn't. Ideas should be free, and there should be no barriers to them, or ownership considered. If you create a thing, everyone else should be able to use that thing however they wish, and with no limitations, to create their own things. Full stop, no exceptions.
This is why I pirate. I will never consider or acknowledge ownership or license when consuming media, art, or information. If you release an idea to the greater world, then it's my idea, my art, my music, my software, just as much as it's yours as the creator. And I'll do with it whatever I will.
cool story bro.
Depends on what tool you're talking about.
Sadly in this case the tool, in its product form, is already in breach of a moral principle, because it is a derivative work and stealing labor without consent.
If you are referring to the GPT algorithms, that's more subtle. We need to figure out how to regulate it better.
Is the artist who writes with inspiration from previous works also stealing? Every story draws from other stories. Most art is always a representation of things that explicit consent was not always recorded to create.
This reminds me of Napster days. We can pontificate endlessly over the moral and philosophical arguments. Meanwhile, time is passing and the tools become more commonplace. I just skip to the end and change with the times. The other option is to die with old fashioned beliefs. Neither option is correct, it just is what it is. Which do you prefer?
You're so right. I guess it doesn't matter what happens between now and the inevitable future. -_-
You can be flippant or you can respond earnestly. You don't want to discuss then don't comment in the first place.
no, it's not
How is it not? The most popular GPT models are trained on copyrighted works.
that isn't stealing.
It is in my country.