That’s what I meant
inv3r5ion
joined 1 week ago
That’s up for the ~~cops~~ courts to prove. This is a sham case. If trump said that shit he would be applauded “oh that’s just trump being trump!”
And who is openAI compensating for their work?
At least adobe is compensating creators. No other big name AI company is doing that. Anyone who uses AI to make “art” is complicit in this theft.
The rest of your argument is putting words in my mouth. Do better. AI is hot garbage and a waste of natural resources.
Don’t get me wrong I hate adobe. But. They at least got AI right. These aren’t big corporations you’re “stealing” movies from. They’re everyday people like myself who’s art is being used by AI for training against my wishes.
They’re not only losing $ they’re also having their work reproduced in a way they don’t support.
Just because it’s cents doesn’t mean it’s “no money”.
I didn’t post my artwork online just to get ripped off by AI and tech bros who see nothing wrong with stealing work from artists.
And so long as we exist under this shit ass system we shouldn’t be stealing from working class artists. It is theft.
Outraged at elections or outraged that despite decades of the football being tossed around each election, that nothing changes, and the only way to make change is via violence at this point?
Well is the ex a CEO?
Stealing from big companies like movie studios? Whatever. Stealing from the working class? Not so great. People should 1. Have the right to not have their work used as training data and 2. If they agree to be used as training data, be compensated.
Without the means to do it it’s not a threat.
The imagery used for the training data isn’t licensed to be used as such. It’s stolen.
“Disposable art” see, you’re telling on yourself about how you view art and artists. There’s a reason people aren’t a fan of this even if you’re doing it as “ethically” as possible.