I agree that the “fruits” of neural networks come from the proletarian artist, because without them, there cannot be any content made of this magnitude. The stunning images created by AI inherently rely on the labor of artists, so its commodity-value—its visual appeal—is thus identical to the labor-value that was scraped into its dataset. In layman’s terms, the artists made the art, and AI imagery looks good because it was taken from that art.

  • @NoiseColor
    link
    12 months ago

    I couldn’t disagree more! We dont need new music? We don’t need new content? That’s absurd. What kind of naive opinion is that? Ai gives a person unprecedented power to create. That’s fantastic!

    Something else is the copyright issue. I don’t know how to address that, but generally my idea of copyright is a bit different anyway. In any case the cat is out of the bag so the direction should be open source models.

    • @VerbFlow@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      -22 months ago

      What sort of life are you living where you still need more content, more so that the rate it’s produced? People from all across the globe are making art using all sorts of tools, there are video games being made all the time, and all LLMs are doing right now is regurgitating the same garbage. Why is this development so important? This isn’t taking a break from work, this isn’t solving climate change, this isn’t self-care or innovating in healthcare!

      Automation is supposed to take time away from physically maufacturing goods so people can take time off to make art; why, then, when the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals are still out of reach, are you people trying to automate art?