You must log in or register to comment.
OC Do Not Steal
Oh cool, that looks easy enough. Let me try:
@skisnow@lemmy.ca @The_Picard_Maneuver@piefed.world
@comicstrips@lemmy.worldDoes the following count as original?
Oh my God! This is your best work … In all my years teaching I’ve never seen something so… needless … to say this is art… I can’t teach you anything
We definitely need a himym community around here
Bit too avant-garde for my tastes.
Looks brand new to me.
Wow! How do you come up with your ideas?
Sometimes I get inspired xx
It completely changes the meaning of the comic. Nice job! I dub thee “original content”
oh wow that’s like, dark
Holy cow! It’s like a new comic, who inspired you?
New Artist: “You’ve inspired me to learn your artistic style and mimic your techniques. Now I’m going to tell my friends and they’re going to start doing it too. And before long, there will be an entire artistic tradition based on your original works.”
Original Artist: “You absolute piece of shit.”
Funny story, I was once on the periphery of a bit of fandom drama (I won’t say which TV fandom cause I don’t want to trigger/dox any crazies) where a particular fandom artist/fanfic writer wrote a popular fanfic with accompanying art. This was successful enough that some other artists within the fandom drew their own sincere art of that fanfic, with appropriate links to the original work.
The author flew off the handle, blocked them all, sent takedown notices, and posted an epic rant about how they were using their intellectual property without permission. When someone (cough) pointed out the hypocrisy of them trying to assert ownership of a setting featuring characters that they themselves didn’t own or have permission for to begin with, they claimed that it was different because everyone already knows the TV show and it belongs to the public, whereas their fanfic of it that they published online was personal to them.
I don’t know if there’s any moral to the story beyond artists are weird and sometimes psycho
I won’t say which TV fandom cause I don’t want to trigger/dox any crazies
I like your original meta joke format. It has inspired me to come up with my own original meta joke format.
(I use Voyager btw)
Hm, how do I get that in voyayer?
Select the user by clicking/tapping their username, then the three dots in the upper right corner and select edit tag 🙂
Edit: Nevermimd had to enable it!
LOL, it wasn’t MLP on that occasion, but it could just as easily have been.
It was my first thought as well, but this situation didn’t sound too familiar to me
My money is on Harry Potter fandom.
Delicious. That’s right up there with that time an indie romance author tried to trademark “cocky” and found herself at the pointy end of millions of romance readers. Premium popcorn material.
I don’t know if there’s any moral to the story
Fuck copyrights
Sounds like the moral of the story is that anti-copyright advocates are hypocrites
Is this about the straight werewolves author?
I don’t know what that is, but it doesn’t surprise me that it’s happened more than once.
This is how it came across to me too but maybe there’s context I’m missing.
A younger or less-experienced person comes up, says “I drew this like you draw!” and you’re mad? That’s a you problem.
Think it’s that they’re saying it’s their own original art when it’s clearly at least replicating the first artist’s style.
Is copying a style bad
No, but lieing about it is
When I was in film school I used to mess with a friend coming back with a exact idea for a script he told me about a week later but with the characters professions changed from writers to clowns. He later learned that I was never going through with my “script” ideas so he stopped getting mad about it.
That’s the thing with (human made) art - even something that’s arguably “the same” is still a product of another person’s effort and viewpoint, and will embody their personal approach to the same task as much as the original does of its artist. It’s a personal story of effort and care, unique to any that attempt it.
For example, music covers. I keep an eye on the youtube channel of Triple J, a radio station that regularly has visiting musical guests perform covers of songs of their choice, and the different approaches to taking on another artist’s music is so interesting. Some do more direct imitations that mirror the original, while others take radically different approaches that bring entirely new meaning. It’s all great stuff.
If anyone here love short novels, random recommendation on the topic: Borges’ Pierre Menard, Author of Don Quixote
Where is the line between copying and inspiring? What is new art?
All artists copy.
“Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery”
It’s also how you learn to do anything.
That’s why I think it’s funny that people hate on AI generated art for using copyrighted artwork for training.
It’s the exact same thing a human would do to learn how to do art.
If a human copies someone else’s art, that is copyright infringement. You say that AI works exactly the same way. Somehow you think that people should not be angry when AI is used to copy their work. If I ask you what is 2+2, will you tell me 5?
The only way AI training is even remotely like how humans learn is if you have a very limited understanding of both how humans learn and how AI model training works.
Also, AI image generation is largely built off datasets of images that are classified and made useful for training by what is effectively slave labor, or at least considerably underpaid third world people.
Please stop anthropomorphizing code. We have generations of study into how the brain forms connections, various aspects of how memories are formed and what keeps some salient and others not, how different people process information and learn differently, how people build skills over time and applied effort… the list goes on. And all of AI is built off absurdly complex math in application, but not as much so in concept.
What I’m getting at is that actual scholarly information sources are out there about how humans learn and develop skills, and there are likewise scholarly sources on how AI and the underlying algorithms work (albeit harder to find unbiased papers with the current hype bubble around AI at the moment).
It doesn’t take much effort to expose yourself to enough to understand that comparing AI training to human learning is an incredibly lossy analogy that doesn’t hold up under barely any scrutiny.
Bro, literally all I said was that the training dataset was the same.
I’m well aware of how generative AI works. I’m an industry professional who attended the very first AI/ML training course by a major cloud provider back in 2023 and was instrumental in changing the way they operated the AI side of the house.
But the parallels are there. Neural networks are designed based on the human brain, and vector driven databases aren’t super dissimilar to how neurons interact. A ton of human memory and processing is based on referential data, like gen AI.
Yes, it might not be able to approximate human intelligence and the actual workings of the brain yet, but it’s on its way.
People tend to forget how computers used to take up entire floors of office buildings and a simple hard drive was the size of an industrial washing machine. Gen AI is in its infancy, and while its current state is highly inefficient and flawed, that’s all the reason for it to improve.
Is current gen AI a solution for anything? Absolutely not. Is it a stepping stone towards true artificial intelligence? Absolutely.
I swear, Lemmy users would have been the people complaining that Excel and Word would be the downfall of society. There are absolutely legitimate complaints about the technology, but to completely dismiss it without looking at the nuances of the situation is assanine.
The truth is that it’s entirely possible for a business to ethically use an LLM. I know this for a fact because I was intimately involved in the implementation of one. The entire thing was trained on our proprietary dataset that had been built over 40 years of industry experience, on our servers which were powered by green energy.
Not exactly the same the human would have to pay to view the art first
Not necessarily but also irrelevant whether they did
What are you talking about? Art is available on the Internet without paying to view it. The same art that the AI models train on.
Still better than AI literally copying the color of pixels and their orientation.
I think he mean his own “original prompt”.
Mr. Lovenstein would like a word with this guy.
tbf, a blue cat is absolutely original art.
The other guy just took a picture of an orange cat.
Now replace the orange guy with AI
