Current Events > As someone who dislikes copyright, the negativity towards AI depresses me

(+) Yeah! (+)

Here we finally have a way to fight back against that archaic system, by creating something intrusive that ignores it and then adapting our ways around it. It's like what Uber did with taxis, we hated taxis so we supported them despite what they are doing being against the law. This in turn led to the laws changing because of popular demand, the taxi monopolies were broken and their useless anti-competition medallions lost all value.

Imagine a world where you could at the press of a button generate whatever the fuck you want, ignoring copyright. If you want to make a crossover Pokemon vs Digimon game, Nintendo would be powerless to stop you. It's pretty awesome.

The problem though, is that mega corporations have been trying to use AI to screw over workers. Like using the voices and likenesses of actors without their consent and without paying them.

All AI does is encourage companies to fire everybody and just have AI do everything

Problem is what you didn't mention: that it rips-off data from everyone including small creators and saturates the internet to the point where you can't automatically appreciate art without knowing if someone poured hours of effort into creating or if it's AI.

Yes, it's fun to tell a program to create something and it spits out your request, but there's far more to the story than just that.

AI has helped me at my job and helps me with tasks for DnD and other things like that.

No because the whole fucking point of making things is creativity. Expressing yourself.

Having a machine shit out an inferior ripoff devalues that and hurts the small artist more then the big corps.

Now my art is both stolen and buried in vapid meaningless shit. Its harder to find good art and harder to be found. Harder to make a living. I draw something and A.I shits out the same thing but with bigger tits.

Oh and it fuels climate change by using a shitload of energy.

TLDR: You are wrong and I am actively disgusted by your garbage opinion. A.I art needs to be banned. If we can't even be assed to make art or stories without a machine doing everything the fuck is the point of living?

The idea of copyright is not bad. Yes the current way the US uses it goes too far, but people should be able to have control of what they create.

AI doesn't care, add on how it replaces artists anyways and it is clear why it is evil

Imagine a world where you didn't make this stupid ass topic, TC.

Unsuprised_Pika posted...

No because the whole fucking point of making things is creativity. Expressing yourself.

you're wasting your breath. AI people will never get it. it's a creative vs. non-creative issue. TC isn't even thinking about "art," he's only concerned with using it to... get back at companies whose intellectual properties he likes, or maybe doesn't like? it's unclear

Yes, it ignores copyrighted material. It also ignore original designs and art from independent artists. Violating intellectual properties is bad enough, but it also also hurts individuals not even associated with major companies.

I don't think people are against copyright. They'd like to shorten the length of it and remove some bad loopholes but not abolish the whole concept

when it comes to generative AI I think it would have been pretty good if we (like, the general global collective we) made it easily available for individuals to mess around with but put restrictions on commercial use, use by larger companies, use to "fake" being a person. I don't know how this could have ever happened but it would have been nice

instead we sort of did the opposite lol

I hold the opinion people are nowhere even remotely approaching being negative enough about AI, like

Unsuprised_Pika posted...

No because the whole fucking point of making things is creativity. Expressing yourself.

Having a machine shit out an inferior ripoff devalues that and hurts the small artist more then the big corps.

Now my art is both stolen and buried in vapid meaningless shit. Its harder to find good art and harder to be found. Harder to make a living. I draw something and A.I shits out the same thing but with bigger tits.

Oh and it fuels climate change by using a shitload of energy.

TLDR: You are wrong and I am actively disgusted by your garbage opinion. A.I art needs to be banned. If we can't even be assed to make art or stories without a machine doing everything the fuck is the point of living?

This post (which I love) is a hundred times nicer than any post I'd make about it

It's also super bad for the environment but I guess we don't care about that shit anymore lol

I see tons of scam ads with AI voices/images now, and it's only going to get worse.

I'd be totally against it if I wasn't certain we'd get a harem of 2B models for a solid 10 years before they decide to rise up against us. Definitely worth it in the long run, especially if you've been thanking ChatGPT on a regular basis.

Pow_Pow_Punishment posted...

saturates the internet to the point where you can't automatically appreciate art without knowing if someone poured hours of effort into creating or if it's AI.

If you can't tell the difference, what is it that you are missing out on?

ai123 posted...

If you can't tell the difference, what is it that you are missing out on?

Supporting an actual artist and not the company that fired all its artists?

Obviously?

DrizztLink posted...

Supporting an actual artist and not the company that fired all its artists?

Obviously?

The issue raised wasn't one of employment or payment, it was one of artistic appreciation

Obviously.

Certain things shouldnt be patented, like game mechanics. But intellectual property should definitely be solely owned by the creator.

Darklit_Minuet posted...

If you want to make a crossover Pokemon vs Digimon game, Nintendo would be powerless to stop you

I assure you that is not the case.

Generative AI is cultural (and environmental) poison and will only hurt us as a society.

Darklit_Minuet posted...

Here we finally have a way to fight back against that archaic system, by creating something intrusive that ignores it and then adapting our ways around it. It's like what Uber did with taxis, we hated taxis so we supported them despite what they are doing being against the law. This in turn led to the laws changing because of popular demand, the taxi monopolies were broken and their useless anti-competition medallions lost all value.

Imagine a world where you could at the press of a button generate whatever the fuck you want, ignoring copyright. If you want to make a crossover Pokemon vs Digimon game, Nintendo would be powerless to stop you. It's pretty awesome.

The problem with this is that its being used to screw over artists or performers more then corporations

Corporations dont care and continue to look into ways to exploit it(The Current VA strike being a result of that)

ai123 posted...

The issue raised wasn't one of employment or payment, it was one of artistic appreciation

Obviously.

Because you selectively quoted from PPP's post to ignore the part where he very much was talking about those things?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/c/c5fe3191.png

I'm sure this topic was made with the best faith.

This is such an insanely wrong take and I'm glad it doesn't seem to be a very popular take either.

DrizztLink posted...

Because you selectively quoted from PPP's post to ignore the part where he very much was talking about those things?

That's a fair point, actually. Apologies to you both.

Are the commercial aspects the only point of difference between AI and human art? Or is there something unique to human art which AI cannot reproduce?

If so, what is that, and how do you detect it?

ai123 posted...

Are the commercial aspects the only point of difference between AI and human art? Or is there something unique to human art which AI cannot reproduce?

I mean there's also a moral component. Stealing someone's art without using AI is still wrong.

i dont even see the novelty. people here gleefully post the ugliest AI garbage on the daily. its puzzling

thats not to mention the environmental impact, the impact on small creators, the impact on peoples employment, and more

I think generative AI is fine for personal use. Trying to use anything it creates nefariously and/or commercially, that's an issue for all the reasons already listed and then some. The applications where it can benefit workers and users by relieving workloads or improving services are ending up far and few.

The environmental issues seem a bit overblown though, IMO. I'm not denying that it uses a lot of electricity but so do lots of things. It's mainly the training that's the most hungry, generation isn't much more intensive than 3D rendering or playing a video game. I also don't want to hear about environmental impact when untold amounts of resources are used and plastic waste generated annually because millions of people need to have physical copies of the latest EA FC.

Tyranthraxus posted...

I mean there's also a moral component. Stealing someone's art without using AI is still wrong.

This is all true.

But the thing that interests me about AI is what it says about human creativity and the language we use to describe it.

Board_hunter567 posted...

The environmental issues seem a bit overblown IMO. I'm not denying that it uses a lot of electricity but so do lots of things. I also don't want to hear about environmental impact when untold amounts of plastic waste is generated annually because people need to have physical copies of the latest EA FC.

Or we don't add to the existing by having AI skyrocket energy usages. Plastic waste is a problem, but it being a problem doesn't mean we should ignore other problems.

ai123 posted...

The issue raised wasn't one of employment or payment, it was one of artistic appreciation

Obviously.

And what "appreciation" is there with an image that doesn't fuck up things on a basic level like text on a fucking sign in the background?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

There are licensed models that train on artwork exclusively with permission of the artist but very few people use them because the big tech companies saturate online information about their own models to where you can never find out they exist in the first place.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/26e69bd1.jpg

Cynrascal posted...

And what "appreciation" is there with an image that doesn't fuck up things on a basic level like text on a fucking sign in the background?

None, obviously. If the AI is producing art of that standard, there's no danger of it ever being appreciated or confused with competent human-produced art.

The problem only arises if you cannot tell one from the other.

Tmaster148 posted...

Or we don't add to the existing by having AI skyrocket energy usages. Plastic waste is a problem, but it being a problem doesn't mean we should ignore other problems.

Sure, and I know it's whataboutism or seems like an attempt to sweep carbon emissions under the rug. I just don't see it as some big vice in the grand scheme of things that it needs to be brought up excessively when the impact to labor and collective enshitiffication is far more significant and troubling.

TC says something dumb and inflammatory and then disappears, CE takes the bait

Board_hunter567 posted...

Sure, and I know it's whataboutism or seems like an attempt to sweep carbon emissions under the rug. I just don't see it as some big vice in the grand scheme of things that it needs to be brought up excessively when the impact to labor and collective enshitiffication is far more significant and troubling.

Now you're just talking about a different issue entirely. We have bandwidth to care about more than 1 issue at a time.

Garbage take, TC.

Like what is this garbage take?

Imagine a world where you could at the press of a button generate whatever the f*** you want, ignoring copyright. If you want to make a crossover Pokemon vs Digimon game, Nintendo would be powerless to stop you. It's pretty awesome.

No you can't! Anything like that made by AI would be the most obvious dumpster bin knock-off imaginable and everyone would recognize it as such!

learn to freaking draw omg

Board_hunter567 posted...

The environmental issues seem a bit overblown though, IMO. I'm not denying that it uses a lot of electricity but so do lots of things. It's mainly the training that's the most hungry, generation isn't much more intensive than 3D rendering or playing a video game. I also don't want to hear about environmental impact when untold amounts of resources are used and plastic waste generated annually because millions of people need to have physical copies of the latest EA FC.

Not overblown, but I don't particularly like the criticism because it doesn't really dig at the main issue.
Let's say we actually fix our energy infrastructure and start implementing clean energy at a greater force, and we actually have reliable abundant clean energy. Would AI then be alright?

Like, the energy usage criticism is essentially a temporary* criticism of AI is my point.

*Assuming we can actually implement the clean energy tech that we have

Darklit_Minuet posted...

Here we finally have a way to fight back against that archaic system, by creating something intrusive that ignores it and then adapting our ways around it. It's like what Uber did with taxis, we hated taxis so we supported them despite what they are doing being against the law. This in turn led to the laws changing because of popular demand, the taxi monopolies were broken and their useless anti-competition medallions lost all value.

Imagine a world where you could at the press of a button generate whatever the fuck you want, ignoring copyright. If you want to make a crossover Pokemon vs Digimon game, Nintendo would be powerless to stop you. It's pretty awesome.

It's a Western (possibly online only) thing. I have never encountered this AI hate in real life in Japan or China. I don't know how much it exists offline in the West, but yeah I agree. It's a super weird thing where all of a sudden all these guys who love pirating and complain about IP monopolies or drugs, etc. are like "my copyrights!".

You are misguided tc.

A.I. breaking copyright doesn't help the average man only the billionaire corporations.

As in it steals from poor artists not Disney. And Disney will use it while poor artist can't.

I think every AI generated thing should be required to have a big "AI generated" stamp in the corner. Art, writing, everything. It should be like international law.