Jeremiah Morelli

This AI garbage has literally zero to do with "amazing nature". If it were up to me, all accounts posting sh** like this would get banned instantly! 😒

Wer an Fakten interessiert ist, sollt vielleicht keine hirntote KI verwenden...

pumpkin ferrari of Las Vegas

Merry Christmas y'all! 😉

I'm conflicted. I usually hate AI, but I do not hate this.^^°

Now kindly fuck off!

"It" isn't frustrating. You are. It's impossible to have a discussion with you. You clearly think AIs are sentient beings that enjoy human rights, you don't even understand the most basic aspects of machine learning and you believe the availability of something grants you usage rights.

If you really can't see a difference here, then you are obviously mentally challenged and I have no interest in discussing the matter any further with you. I'm not going to argue with a moron. Have a good day!

Midjourney's founder David Holz openly admitted that they had used "hundreds of millions" of images without consent. These people don't give a damn.

What the heck are you talking about? AI companies have been very open about stating that they didn't licence their training data. They argue it's fair use. LAION 5B is a collection of 5.8 billion images scraped from all over the web, with at least 350 of those images belongig to me.

They are not hard question. You just refuse to understand. Please explain to me how AI companies (not their AIs!) are doing anything remotely similar to what human artists do!

That question would only be relevant if the AI had free will and was responsible for its actions.
Do you see a difference between you looking at a bunch of pictures to learn from some of them and you downloading a bunch of pictures to feed them into a machine for statistical analysis?

AI companies are downloading content that is legally not theirs and they are feeding it into machines with the sole purpose of competing with the copyright holders.

And once more: They are NOT doing anything remotely comparable to what a human artist would do. They are neither looking at nor learning anything from any of the images contained in datasets like LAION 5B.

You are asking the wrong questions. An AI is not a sentient being. It doesn't do anything on its own. Laws apply to humans, not machines. Don't ask whether an AI is allowed to do something, ask whether the companies behind the AIs are allowed to do what they are doing.

Kindly stop putting words into my mouth! I never said we should stop using wheels. I said comparing an AI to a brain is as inaccurate as comparing a wheel to legs.

It's not special and I never said it was. But it very clearly differs from what an AI does. There are numerous differences between the way a machine learns and the way a human learns.

Do you not know the difference between "public domain" and "publicly available"? Availability is meaningless, otherwise I would be allowed to rob you every time you left your home.

The AI's dataset isn't vastly larger, but unlike ours it's curated and labeled. And 100% of the AI's dataset was created by humans. Most of what we humans take in comes from our real life surroundings and isn't a collection of man-made copyrighted images.

It isn't inspired. It uses statistical data to create a mathmatically probable output. And an AI only operates like our brain on a very fundamental level. Saying an AI operates like a brain is like saying a wheel operates like our legs because it allows an entity to cover a distance.

Are you arguing that because humans are allowed to get inspired by art and learn from it, AI companies should be allowed to NOT do that and instead have the right to download it and feed it into machines?

I never said AIs were stealing. It's the companies behind the AIs that are stealing. The people there are doing none of the things you described. Their actions are limited to taking copyrighted content and feeding it into machines intended to compete with the copyright owners.

Some LLMs like ChatGPT might give links under certain conditions, but this isn't a general rule. Diffusion Models to my knowledge never link to anything and never credit their training data; in fact many AI companies like OpenAI or Midjourney actively hide their datasets from the public.

"Free" images come with a CC0 license. You probably mean freely availale images. Regardless, yes, you are probably using them commercially. But you aren't competing with the websites you got your information from and you're expected to name your sources.

"The Reader's Path"

Originally painted in 2012, slighty updated in 2021. The book titles are some of my favorite novels from when I was a teenager :)

#digitalpainting #fantasy #reading #books #NoAI #digitalart

It's your stupidity that angers me, because I feel like I'm wasting my time with some idiot. But I'm done now. Have a good day.

Have you ever been NOT able to create art or write?

Why don't you take that keyboard and smash it against your face a few times. Really hard. Since you can't see it, maybe you can't feel it either.

You still don't get it, do you? Writers compete with writers. Artists compete with artists. AI lets non-writers compete with writers, and non-artists compete with artists. By using their own content against them.

The mere fact that you were able to type those lines is proof that you were able to see the keyboard in front of you. The way the human brain processes the things it sees is irrelevant here.

Well, one big difference is that AI companies are using the data commercially.