• tpyo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    17 hours ago

    That’s the beauty of art. It spawns discussion and it can’t be nailed down to any singular definition. You and the person you responded to are completely correct

    I think with ai art though the issue is not the user’s ability to tweak the prompts but more the fact that anything generated from an AI is stolen work

    If there was a way to train your own ai (llm, genai) off of your own creations or the works of others with their explicit consent then I’d consider that art. But the biggest issue right now is many of these ais are using stolen work across the board to generate their images, regardless of how much time and care goes into crafting the perfect prompt

    • 8uurg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I think that is less of a problem with the technology itself, but rather in how it is currently used or created. I wouldn’t say that anything generated with AI is stolen work, as that predicates that AI necessarily involves stealing.

      I vaguely remember Adobe Firefly using images only with proper licensing to the point they will allow themselves to be legally held responsible (though some AI generated work did make it into their stock image site, which makes the ethics part vague, even if it will in all likelihood be legally impossible to pin down). Sadly, this is Adobe, and this stuff is all behind closed doors, you have to pay them pretty significant sum and you can’t really mess with the internals there.

      So for now there is a choice between ethics, openness, and capability (pick at most two). Which, frankly, is a terrible state to be in.