• Even_Adder@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The misconception that this is stealing is understandable, but it misses the mark. The model is used to create novel works, and it consists of original analysis of the training data in comparison with one another, not the images themselves. Neither analysis nor creation constitute theft.

    While mechanisms for learning differ, denying that you can produce output that doesn’t appear in the set is unfair. If that’s not learning, what is?

    We also don’t need to compare quality. Art’s value transcends technical skill. The subjective nature of quality and limitations of generative models make these comparisons pointless. Instead of a threat to tradition, I see this as a tool with unique challenges and possibilities.

    You should check out this article by the EFF, and this one by the Association of Research Libraries. I think we can have a nuanced discussion without simplistic arguments.