196

17478 readers

283 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

Other rules

Behavior rules:

No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
No genocide denial
No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
No namecalling
Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
Other things seen as cleary bad

Posting rules:

No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
No advertisements
No gore / violence
Mutual aid posts are not allowed

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1350

AI rule (media.infosec.exchange)

submitted 2 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

184 comments fedilink hide all child comments

source

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Oh cool, you think misrepresenting and overly simplifying other people's points of view and an accurate representation of how certain copyright laws work (even when that's an inconvenient truth) is ethically justified as long as I can tell my anti AI homies that I stood up for them by 'dunking' on a person arguing in good faith for them to fight the right battles, and not cling to false ideas which will lead them to suffer more in the long term and turn people who would support them against them by spouting easily disputed lies.

But sure, go ahead! I'm sure you'll change so many minds by immediately disregarding everything they say by putting them in a box of "thiefs" because they said something that didn't fit very specifically within your "Guidebook to hating anything related to AI".

Now back to a serious discussion if you're up for it. Creative freedom is built on the notion that ideas are the property of nobody, it is a requirement since every artist in existence has derived their work from the work of others. It's not even controversial, using your definition of stealing means all artists 'steal' from each other all the time, and nobody cares. But because a robot does it (despite that robot being in 100% control of the artist using it), it's suddenly the most outrageous thing.

I know for sure my ideas have been 'stolen' from my publicized works, but I understand I had no sole right to that idea to begin with. I can't copyright it. And if a 'thief' used those ideas in a transformative manner rather than create something that tries to recreate what I made (which would be actual infringement), they have every right to as without that right literally nobody would be allowed to make anything since everything we make is inspired by something that we don't hold a copyright over. Most of the people actually producing stuff that will be displayed publicly so other people will experience and pull it apart to learn from understand we have no right to those ideas to begin with, except in how we applied those ideas in a specific work.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Think of how much actual art you could've made in the time it took you to shill for the thing that's stealing art and fucking over creatives and using personal data to spy on people

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Oh yeah, shame on me, spending a part of my day 'shilling' for myself and my friends and colleagues. And 'shilling' for a better future for us all by dissuading people from weaponizing bad arguments and misunderstandings to defend themselves, because that will not help them one bit. The latter part of you sentence is such utter nonsense that I don't even need to respond to that.