Comment

Comment by clarkmoody

> all of the AI models that are being used to replace artists were trained through the mass theft of those very same artists’ work

This seems to be the underlying moral justification for creatives' opposition of AI. Job destruction is the obvious self-interested justification.

My question (probably not original) is this: which biological neural network was not trained on copyrighted material from other artists? Which guitarist never listened to classic rock bands? Which painter never looked at Monet? Nearly all successful artists publicly recognize the influence of prior art on their development and style (and the rest are lying).

A quick hypothetical:

Let's say instead of hoovering up billions of images from data dumps, the AI researchers took a still camera to all the art galleries on the planet and snapped photos of art, then trained the neural network on those photos. Is this still "theft" of the artists' work? What about if an embodied AI in a robot chassis did the same, then painted new art with oil & canvas? Is this still theft?

Perhaps this example fails because it's not enough data? But is it a difference in degree or a difference in kind?

parent clarkmoody 16 days ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton