195

Source (Bluesky)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] crmsnbleyd@sopuli.xyz 8 points 3 days ago

I think you'll find it is called stealing to copy something without permission, and copyright infringement can deprive the originator, like if someone copied the lyrics of a song someone else released 2 days back without credit. Modern copyright law is widely abused but that doesn't change the fact that taking art without permission is stealing, no matter what your personal definition is.

The stealing in the studio ghibli case is ingesting all of the studio ghibli art without paying them for it, and while outputting, clearly labeling it as studio ghibli style.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

I think you are wrong.

Stealing requires depriving someone of their property.

If my daughter draws a character from Totoro she has done nothing wrong. She has not stolen anything. If my daughter draws a new character in the style of Totoro she has also not stolen anything.

What you are talking about is copyright infringement.

Let me ask you this. If OP was replaced by an artist from India who works for 1/10 the price would this all be suddenly okay?

No, it would not be. The problem this person is complaining about is not about AI. It is a much bigger problem that both of you fail to recognize.

[-] BlueSquid0741@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 3 days ago

I think you are wrong.

Those things might not be a problem for you. But they are for hundreds, thousands or millions of other people.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

What are you even talking about. Please state what you think is the problem.

[-] BlueSquid0741@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 days ago

Mate, refer to the original post.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Mate, I already explained it is not stealing. When I said I think you are wrong about the definition of stealing I was being generous.

The definition of stealing is literally depriving someone else of property. This does not happen in copyright cases which are a civil matter rather than criminal matter.

The OP is also wrong for the reasons I already pointed out. Those being that the reason they are losing their job is not because of AI but because they work for a shitty capitalist corporation.

As I alluded if his job would have been replaced by a foreigner who was paid far less he would also not be okay with it and his comic would likely look very racist.

This is because the problem is not AI in this situation. Do you have an opinion on this?

[-] BlueSquid0741@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 days ago

That the original post covers more than stealing and losing job.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

That would be a no then. Cheers!

[-] BlueSquid0741@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 days ago

I’m just not interested in your bad faith argument. It sounds like you think AI is good. It isn’t, for every reason in the original post and more.

That’s the end of it pretty much. This is a bad technology that is party of the way humanity keeps trying to destroy ourselves. Nothing that you love about AI changes that.

No more. Bye.

this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
195 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck AI

2561 readers
817 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS