194

Source (Bluesky)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

Everything about this is wrong and just reactionary garbage.

There is plenty to hate about AI and how it is being implemented, but "stealing" is not what is going on.

Particularly hollow are comments about low quality as shitty artists getting paid for less over competent artists has been going on forever.

This is definitely hate the players and not the game scenario. There is no reason for a company to let go of an artist because of AI. This is a shitty decision made by garbage players.

The reason they do this has almost nothing to do with the technology itself. As I commented before companies have always raced to the bottom when it comes to paying artists. This is clearly a cultural problem.

[-] crmsnbleyd@sopuli.xyz 11 points 3 days ago

A lot of images ingested while training AI have been taken without permission. Most obvious is the recent flux of studio ghibli style art, which openAI has admitted to using without permission.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Art is iterative so the concept that you need permission to use a style is ridiculous. Certainly Studio Ghibli did not invent that art style.

As I was saying "stealing" is bullshit because you are not depriving the originator of anything. What you are talking about is copyright infringement.

Personally I detest the whole concept of imaginary property. So your not going to convince me AI is bad because of it.

[-] petrol_sniff_king 3 points 2 days ago

"stealing" is bullshit because you are not depriving the originator of anything.

This is such a sovereign citizen tier argument. "Officer, I wasn't driving, I was travelling."

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

"In law, "stealing" generally refers to the act of taking someone else's property without their consent and with the intent to permanently deprive them of it. "

Clearly you are full of it. That is why copyright is a civil and not criminal matter.

https://www.rutgers.edu/news/when-stealing-isnt-stealing-theft-law-21st-century

At any rate, I get it. You are probably some corporate bootlicker who thinks copyright protects the artist.

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago

Imagine thinking you aren't a corporate bootlicker when you defend AI.

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

Please read my original post. There are plenty of good reasons to hate AI. You want to talk about them?

[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

AI harvesting the work of others without permission and without compensation for profit is a good reason to hate AI.

[-] petrol_sniff_king 2 points 2 days ago

Let's end I.P. law and burn down the datacenters. Since you hate I.P. so much, I assume this is the easiest offer in the world to you.

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

Oh please, if that was the truth then AI proves it wouldn't happen. After all they have pretty much violated the copyright of every artist on earth without so much as a slap on the wrist.

I get it, you don't like AI. I don't like how we are using these Large Language Models speculations to create a boom/bust economic cycle. This isn't even the worst of it as it is also being used by authoritarian governments to target people. To top it off it is just a general buzz word businesses are using to rip off consumers.

There are a lot more negative things as well. What OP is upset about though is a problem with business in general. If you are going to hate on AI at least hate it for real reasons.

[-] petrol_sniff_king 1 points 2 days ago

If you are going to hate on AI at least hate it for real reasons.

Peter Thiel, and his incestuous coven of vampires, have funded this machine's creation to replace newspaper comic artists. Do you disagree? That's what it did.

Or, do you think I don't also have criticisms of capitalism.

[-] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Yes, I do disagree. As I pointed out this is the result of working for a shitty corporation.

Are all newspapers firing all artists? No, not at all.

There are great reasons not to like AI. Violations to copyright and bad business practices using at as an excuse to lay off staff are not the reasons. It is a red hearing.

I don't know what you think of capitalism. You could let me know if you like.

[-] petrol_sniff_king 1 points 2 days ago

and bad business practices using at as an excuse to lay off staff

Yes, of course, what we need are good billionaires.

Anyone can choose not to fire a gun---I don't want the gun in the room. If you want the gun for other reasons, then build it to fire blanks.

Are all newspapers firing all artists? No, not at all.

Is this at all because: 1) it is wildly unpopular, 2) it is, for now, kind of shit at its job.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
194 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck AI

2561 readers
985 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