Recent searches
Search options
It is impossible for my turnip soup business to make money if you enforce laws that make it illegal for me to steal turnips.
Paying for turnips is not realistic.
You bureaucrats don't understand food.
@davey_cakes so the whole problem with this entire discussion is that it's lose-lose for consumers. Yes, open AI is awful and what they are doing is awful. But at the same time, finally against it without adopting a copyright maximalist argument is difficult.
Your turnips are out at your stand at the farmers market. What I want to do isn't to take your turnips but to take a picture of them and use them.
@Amoshias @davey_cakes This analogy doesn’t quite work. A closer version would be that I take a picture of your lovely turnip stand at the farmers market, and then use it to globally market substandard turnips that claim to have all the authenticity of yours. I then price you out of the market while simultaneously devaluing the entire concept of the turnip. In the end no one even considers turnip a type of food anymore.
@Frantasaur @davey_cakes I'm sorry, but that's not even vaguely close.
The best analogy isn't an analogy at all, it's reality. An artist reads books, looks at paintings, watches movies, walks through nature, and all of these things inform their art. Some directly - a painter may copy a specific brush technique. Some abstractly - a work may inspire a new one. All of these mix together in the artist's output.
How do you stop openAI's bullshit without harming that?
@Amoshias @davey_cakes but in your artist example it means something to the artist, i.e. the artist is attempting to communicate something of themselves to the world, and their new output doesn’t scale up to completely devalue the entire concept of creativity. Parsing a data set into another format for financial gain is not the same as art inspiring art, no matter how complex the mathematics behind the algorithm. The data set angle is what they need to go after here i think?