Maybe all digital content just shouldn’t be trusted. It’s like some kind of demon-realm or something. Navigable by the wise but for common fools like you and I, perilous. Full of illusion.
I’m more like a moron fool, but ok.
Eh, that makes it too easy for AI to avoid eating its own excrement
interesting counterpoint. but i also imagine if ai content was correctly tagged, traffic to slop content would dramatically decrease, reducing incentive to post the content in the first place.
i don’t know which force is stronger but i think both certainly exist.
This. Don’t let AI or AI posters know that you caught on. Just report them and be on your way.
Slop is insulting. If I take the time to read it, I want another human to have taken the time to write it.
Agree to an extent. Its a tool that can aid talentless folk like myself shitpost, and has its place. But I agree with tags and disagree with inundating forums and stealing ip
The counter there is to have an AI summarize it. No time taken to write nor to read haha
That would work if it didn’t get even that wrong a huge amount of time. There are entire subreddits dedicated to AI summary fails!
Cherry picked and edited to give bad answers. Go play around with any of the big models, you’ll be bored and disappointed because 99.9% of the time it will give you exactly what you ask for.
Except Gemini. Gemini is a drunk.
Admins get on this
Totally agree. Yes.
Yeah they “should” be, but I don’t really think it’s practically possible to implement and enforce a rule like that.
Most photos taken or edited on a cell phone are enhanced with AI. Where do you draw the line?
A.I. generated 👉here is the line👈 A.I. enhanced
That will do 👌
so if I use an AI engine to do in-painting on an existing image, then that’s fine? This image is AI enhanced:
Would it need to be tagged? (obviously should be tagged NSFL)
All of your points are valid, it is hard to draw definitive line, but so will be hard moderating the content because there will be people not giving correct tags to their posts, so even if there will be specific labels for “A.I. generated”, “modified using A.I.” etc people still will avoid using them, intentionally or not
That is AI edited, not enhanced
But not AI generated!
Is it? Or did I make it in Gimp?
If you can’t tell, does it matter?
Yes
I get the intent but I feel that Photoshop and CGI are just as important to label.
Why?
Because generative AI should burn in hell.
It’s here to stay. You’re a luddite with no understanding of the subject matter and should fuck off. The hate bubble is deflating
You’re free to show your AI images to your AI friends who will give you AI congratulations. I’m not sure why I need to be a part of this masturbation.
Do you think computers are generating images for other computers to look at? I applaud your optimism about AI but we’re not there yet. There are always people involved
No, I think the bitcoin nft metaverse gooners of yesteryear have found a new thing to pretend is the future.
Are we saying Yes to AI or yes to Dolores?
Because if the latter… 🤤
Because edited pictures and CGI require actual effort?, the artist will credit themselves, but ai “artist” most of the time did say it’s ai generated
Westworld-Season-4-Finale-Lisa-Joy
Yes.
Ew, steve chowder the nazi
in all honesty i just know the meme 🤔
The person in the picture is a piece of shit right wing commentor.
fixed
Thanks for mentioning this. I was so confused at these comments. Vincent may be a terrible guy, but he ain’t a Nazi.
There are two versions of Calvin & Hobbes that could be used in his place.
Here’s a better version for you friend
next time 👌
And it should be tagged at every level: metadata, watermark, poster, website. Redundancies will make it harder to use AI for lying.
Internet-wide, culture-wide, society-wide.
Text, sure. But I don’t get the hate towards AI generated images. If it’s a good image and it’s not meant to mislead, I am completely fine with AI content. It’s not slop if it’s good.
It’s still stolen content. Regardless of any other issues, it’s 100% stolen content.
So I assume you are morally opposed to piracy?
There’s a pretty clear difference in the two. If piracy ended in a new digital good that removes the market for the original good while eliminating the jobs of those that made the original good, then it’d be close. Even then pretty much everyone agrees not all piracy is the same; you wouldn’t pirate an indie game that hasn’t sold well unless you’re an absolute piece of subhuman shit.
well uh, idk how to break it to you but it kinda does.
Piracy doesn’t equal a 1:1 sale, that argument is true, however that argument works with both AI and piracy plus it goes both ways.
The more people who do it via the free method, the less people who /may/ have bought it via the paid method. Meaning the less profit/earnings for the affected party.
However, since it goes both ways, obtaining the item via the free method does not mean that they would have purchased the paid good if the free good wasn’t available.
Both versions the original market is still available, regardless of method used.
I highly disagree that piracy and AI are any different at least in the scenario you provided.
if anything AI would be a morally higher ground imo, as it isn’t directly taking a product, it’s making something else using other products.
Being said I believe that CC’s should be paid for the training usage, but that’s a whole different argument.
It’s not solely about pay, but also what your work is used for. It makes sense you don’t understand this if you’ve never created anything, artwise or otherwise. If I draw a picture I control who displays that picture and for what purpose. If someone I don’t like uses that picture without permission it reflects poorly on me, and destroys my rights.
The easy example is an art piece by a Holocaust survivor being used by a neonazi without permission.
Now imagine you steal tens of millions of artists work. You know for a fact you don’t have the licenses needed to ensure their work is used to their liking.
I really enjoyed the “Hobbit: Extended Edition” project which condensed the three films of the Hobbit trilogy down into a single film, and as an unofficial fan-made project, is only available online for free.
Under that proposed gradient, I’m not sure where that would fall, given that it is a transformative work which uses the work of others to make them redundant (in this case, the original trilogy and the studios which would have otherwise profited from those sales).
I feel like there’s a better way to divide it, but it will be difficult to negotiate the exact line against the long-held contradictory ideas that art should both be divorced from its creator once released but also that the creator is entitled to full control and profit until the expiry of its copyright.
I am torn on that. If it’s a company making money off of it, despicable. If it’s an open source model used for memes? I’m fine with that. We shouldn’t act like artists follow some magical calling from god. Anything anyone creates is built on their education and the media they were exposed to. I don’t think generative models are any different.
Normalizing is a thing, on top of that there are still indie markets that can be supplanted by gan image generation. On top of that artists still have rights to their work, if they didn’t explicitly license their works for the model, it’s theft that removes the value of the original.
this bullshit again…
Yes, just because you disagree that your new toy is literally theft and is one of the most irresponsible inventions since leaded gasoline, that doesn’t change anything.
Sorry you’re the type of person that added lead shot to your gas tank after they banned leaded gasoline.
Sorry you’re the type of person that added lead shot to your gas tank after they banned leaded gasoline.
Well that devolved quickly. People with attitudes like yours make other people really not give a shit what your argument is. Also makes me know you can’t or won’t understand that I don’t really care what happens to AI, and that since there is no data taken it cannot be stolen. But you cant understand that I guess, and we have the same tired arguments.
At least I am some what happy that the corporate control is getting taken down by open source, that models are being jail broken or freed, and that people are realizing the what we have are only LLM’s and generative noise algo’s: not AI.
I am in complete agreement with this. While you can currently tell what’s AI it won’t be long before we’re scratching our heads wondering which way is up and which way is down. Hell, I saw an AI generated video of a cat cooking food. It looked real sortve.
I think ai posts should only be posted on ai communities so I can block them all at the same time.
Seriously. Even for memes and funny stuff ai needs to fuck off.
And the fact that everyone even calls it ai when it’s not even close to being a vi is infuriating.
Dude… or should I say, dude??? 🤖
Compling
Yeah that about sums it up
Personally, I don’t really care.
I do enjoy some types of AI content, I do not enjoy others. Same as any other type of content. So that tag would be useless for my personal preferences.
Anyway nsfw tag is made not for moral reasons, but to avoid those images showing when you are in an environment that’s not proper for them (basically so it doesn’t look like you are watching porn at work), this makes no sense for AI content, So I don’t see the point besides some kind of persecution driven by a particular ideology. So I don’t support it.
It should be fineable starting at like 500 dollars + any profits and ad revenue if its not labelled
How much money is a Lemmy upvote?
At least one money?
