Artists active communities are probably getting torches and pitchforks right now against the AI because they fear losing their comissions, even petty ones. It don’t take much to get kicked out in such atmosphere.
I don’t think this issue is specific to reddit or reflects on reddit at all. Reddit is closer to the fediverse than something like twitter; it has a multitude of subs and they are moderated by different people. This exact thing could happen on any lemmy instance/community.
The issue, in my view, is AI art and unilaterally banning art on the basis of being AI generated. If AI art is good enough to be confused with human art and there’s no foolproof method of detecting it, then banning it isn’t reasonably enforceable.
Why do they happen at some websites, but not others? It’s how they’re administered. Twitter is bad too.
unilaterally banning art on the basis of being AI generated. (…)
I completely understand them. It’s the same thing within the speedrunning community, where it’s sometimes quite hard to distinguish AI records. They’re cheating, simple as.
Art is de facto “human”, since art as a concept is established while computer generated pieces like we’re talking about is the new field. (Speedrunning is “human” because it’s the common consensus, same with mechanical performance enhancers in sport)
I’m not sure if it can even be called art as there is no artistic intent behind it. I think a lot of them are quite beautiful, in the same way I find a lot of nature beautiful. The art is in the eye of the beholder, not in the design or more correctly in both nature and AI - in the evolution.
All of this would have been avoided if AI generated images would be posted in i.e. /r/AIart
If AI art is good enough to be confused with human art and there’s no foolproof method of detecting it, then banning it isn’t reasonably enforceable.
I agree. But same goes for school. If teachers can’t detect AI generated homework and it’s not reasonably enforceable - Should there even be rules against this type of cheating?
Of course there should.
To me, the main issue here is the copyright. All AI works as far as I know are based on existing pieces of art. Machine learning is somewhat copying others work to “educate” themselves, much like I read a book to absorb it’s knowledge.
The main difference is that my creators (thanks, mom and dad. I guess.) didn’t create me with the specific intent of creating the best book ever by making me read a ton of books. If something like that happens, it would be of my own agenda.
An agenda (publicly known) AI’s don’t have for now. They’re programmed to have certain goals, they’re a product.
Artists active communities are probably getting torches and pitchforks right now against the AI because they fear losing their comissions, even petty ones. It don’t take much to get kicked out in such atmosphere.
Reddit is bad. People who accept the status quo over there must also accept the status quo over there - Banned for bogus reasons.
Do all the reddit-complainers think it couldn’t happen to them? There’s always such indignation and surprise.
The debate about AI art is interesting. People getting permanently banned from Reddit for bullshit reasons is routine.
I don’t think this issue is specific to reddit or reflects on reddit at all. Reddit is closer to the fediverse than something like twitter; it has a multitude of subs and they are moderated by different people. This exact thing could happen on any lemmy instance/community.
The issue, in my view, is AI art and unilaterally banning art on the basis of being AI generated. If AI art is good enough to be confused with human art and there’s no foolproof method of detecting it, then banning it isn’t reasonably enforceable.
Why do they happen at some websites, but not others? It’s how they’re administered. Twitter is bad too.
I completely understand them. It’s the same thing within the speedrunning community, where it’s sometimes quite hard to distinguish AI records. They’re cheating, simple as.
Art is de facto “human”, since art as a concept is established while computer generated pieces like we’re talking about is the new field. (Speedrunning is “human” because it’s the common consensus, same with mechanical performance enhancers in sport)
I’m not sure if it can even be called art as there is no artistic intent behind it. I think a lot of them are quite beautiful, in the same way I find a lot of nature beautiful. The art is in the eye of the beholder, not in the design or more correctly in both nature and AI - in the evolution.
All of this would have been avoided if AI generated images would be posted in i.e. /r/AIart
I agree. But same goes for school. If teachers can’t detect AI generated homework and it’s not reasonably enforceable - Should there even be rules against this type of cheating?
Of course there should.
To me, the main issue here is the copyright. All AI works as far as I know are based on existing pieces of art. Machine learning is somewhat copying others work to “educate” themselves, much like I read a book to absorb it’s knowledge.
The main difference is that my creators (thanks, mom and dad. I guess.) didn’t create me with the specific intent of creating the best book ever by making me read a ton of books. If something like that happens, it would be of my own agenda.
An agenda (publicly known) AI’s don’t have for now. They’re programmed to have certain goals, they’re a product.