Setting aside the usual arguments on the anti- and pro-AI art debate and the nature of creativity itself, perhaps the negative reaction that the Redditor encountered is part of a sea change in opinion among many people that think corporate AI platforms are exploitive and extractive in nature because their datasets rely on copyrighted material without the original artists’ permission. And that’s without getting into AI’s negative drag on the environment.

  • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    I don’t see how it’s that different from someone using photo-editing software built with dozens of algorithms instead of a ‘pure’ drawing pad, or someone using a drawing pad instead of a pencil, or someone using a pencil instead of chalk. It’s a tool, and a great one at that in comparison to many digital tools for artists.

    It is different because a person isn’t involved, it’s a machine outputting the information without intent whatsoever (as machines do)

    • Keith@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      That’s not true though— extensive effort is put into prompting, parameter tweaking, etc.