AI pulling from a database to recreate artstyles is much more destructive than human inspiration.

Imagine you're a child book illustrator. Your work is out there and accessible. Now someone has the idea to get into it using AI. They really like your artstyle and tell the AI your name. Now the AI spits out illustrations in your artstyle, and many people might not even be able to tell the difference.

This random person uploads it or maybe even contacts your publisher. Worst case scenario they even buy his work and not care about the quality of the stories. Now you're actually replaced.

Now is this not copyright infringement?

Having the AI cite sources is not a solution to this as people will simply detach them. Having signatures on your works is not a solution and it actually makes it worse because then the AI copies it and now it looks like signed work from you.

When I first saw people using AI to make great images I thought the same. It's just a non human inspiration cycle. But human inspiration is so so different. You don't just look at existing images. EVERYTHING you've ever seen is an inspiration. Everything you've ever read heard or done too.

Human inspiration is one thing. Creation takes skill practice and time. AI creation doesn't. The program might have required skill to write, but that's not an excuse for it to threaten entire industries.

God Fairphones are great honestly! Highly highly likely my next phone will be one since I hate switching devices and setting new ones up... The longer i can keep using my current device the better...

God Fairphones are great honestly! Highly highly likely my next phone will be one since I hate switching devices and setting new ones up... The longer i can keep using my current device the better...