'The industry'? By which you mean Shutterstock and the like? If they are, they're losing.The industry is actively working on this.
'The industry'? By which you mean Shutterstock and the like? If they are, they're losing.The industry is actively working on this.
I mean Open AI, Google and others. They are actively working on ways to embed identification on the images as to their origins, so people can't hide the fact it is AI generated.'The industry'? By which you mean Shutterstock and the like? If they are, they're losing.
They may, but not everybody will. And those who wish to hide it will simply use platforms which don't. There will always be easy ways to avoid that.I mean Open AI, Google and others. They are actively working on ways to embed identification on the images as to their origins, so people can't hide the fact it is AI generated.
And people sell knock off purses on Ebay.They may, but not everybody will. And those who wish to hide it will simply use platforms which don't. There will always be easy ways to avoid that.
I'm not sure why you said that. Were you hallucinating me saying that Open AI shouldn't take measures?And people sell knock off purses on Ebay.
We can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
AI itself isn't the issue. It's the plagiarism angle which is the issue. But that's an entire angry people-shouting-at-each-other debate of its own which has been done a thousand times on these forums. I don't think we need to do it again. I'm trying to talk about how folks treat artists at the moment.AI is becoming so integrated into technology that if you take an all-or-nothing stance, at some point it seems all digital art itself has to be called into question. Is there not legitimate use of AI tools by artists that is acceptable?
I see this as a win.Unless people keep making accusations, some of which will - I completely agree - be proven baseless, then we'll gradually see more and more "low detectability" AI art creep into stuff.
Maybe pull back on the idea it is some sort of monstrous behavior?
The divisiveness over AI art is far more troublesome than AI art itself.
This is bollocks.The fact that false positives are common, and have unpleasant repercussions, does not somehow mean that it suddenly becomes more ethical to use tools that deny artists pay owed for their work.
Maybe the divisiveness is troublesome.
But, the division is really just, "Should we pay artists to use their art, or should we not pay them for their work?"
So, is the troublesome thing "divisiveness" or "how eager some are to deny artists pay for their work"?