this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2023
25 points (66.2% liked)

Technology

57609 readers
4487 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I disagree, you can see signatures and figures drawn by individual artists in even the largest models of today. Also, only a fraction are what you specified

Though trillions may be used, only billions are of dragons, millions of clocks, and thousands of something more specific or in certain style. A picture of a cat has nothing to do with the prompt "rick and Morty inflation porn, big feet, (feet:1.3), cartoon, drawn, colourful"

I've worked in the AI field specializing in vectorization, a method of creating automated systems to catch failures, and it's clear to me what gets imprinted onto the nodes is just other peoples work. The line-work, colouration, composition, etc. on a particular output will be from a tiny fraction of the models training and will be, individually per addition or edit, directly taken from a handful of images.

This is why you can get text based or code based AI to word for word output some of their trained work. Same with image based, though only pieces again.

All the actual decision making, the colouration, the composition, line-work, perspective, base stylistic choice, etc. will be made by another person or people before being detected by the AI and output when the correct input (prompt) is given.

To be clear, If I had called Pokemon fish whenever you put in the word fish something stylistically Pokemon would be output with nothing to do with fish. It's not learning what our prompt actually means just what gets it a head pat from the dev.

It's not just learning what a word means and outputting a new image, it's finding a way to output the original data in a way that makes somebody like me, an AI dev, say "yeah that's about right". That's all

Once more, because each time I stare I hate AI I get misinterpreted, I hate that it's taking without permission. If that is granted then it's perfectly moral.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If I like a particular element of a piece of art, like the way they painted a distinctive piece of clothing in a portrait, and I copy that element in my own work, am I stealing their work?

[–] sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Did you trace the linework, did you copy near exactly the colouration and composition, could you place one over the other and see it's very close to the origional? if so, yes. Yes you did. If you think to yourself, I like these specific elements of this art and am going to take them into account while creating a new piece, with new ideas, then no. You did not. AI art does the first. It doesn't know what makes up the art. It can't. It just knows if I take this data from the origional data set and place it in this manner when this term is present I have done well. It's just pattern recognition, no critical thought