ITT: People who didn’t check the community name
Some many in these comments are like "what about the ethical source data ones?"
Which ones? Name one.
None of the big ones are. Wtf is ethically sourced? E.g. Ebay wants to collect data for ai shit. My mom has an account, and she could opt out of them using her data but when I told her about it, she told me that she didn't understand. And she moved on. She just didn't understand what the fuck they are doing and why she might should care. But I guess it is "ethically" sourced as they kinda asked by making it opt out, I guess.
That surely is very ethical and you can not critic it for it... As we all know, an 50yo adult fucking a 14yo would also be totally cool as long as the 14yo doesn't say no. Right? That is how our moral compass work. /S
Fucking disgusting. All of you tech bro complain about people not getting ai or tech in general and then talk about ethically sourced data. I spit on you.
I love IT, I work in it and I live it, but I have morals and you could too
Edit: after a bunch of messages telling me that I am wrong. I wonder when they will realize that they are making my point. I am saying that it isn't ethically sourced without consent and uninformed consent isn't consent. And they are tell me, an it professional with an interest in how machine learning functions ever since alphago and 7 years before the ai hype, that I don't understand it. If I don't understand it, what makes you believe the general public understands and can consent to it. If I am wrong about ai, I am wrong about ai but I am not wrong about the unethical nature of that data, people don't understand it.
And this is where I split with Lemmy.
There's a very fragile, fleeting war between shitty, tech bro hyped (but bankrolled) corporate AI and locally runnable, openly licensed, practical tool models without nearly as much funding. Guess which one doesn't care about breaking the law because everything is proprietary?
The "I don't care how ethical you claim to be, fuck off" attitude is going to get us stuck with the former. It's the same argument as Lemmy vs Reddit, compared to a "fuck anything like reddit, just stop using it" attitude.
What if it was just some modder trying a niche model/finetune to restore an old game, for free?
That's a rhetorical question, as I've been there: A few years ago, I used ESRGAN finetunes to help restore a game and (seperately) a TV series. Used some open databases for data. Community loved it. I suggested an update in that same community (who apparently had no idea their beloved "remaster" involved oldschool "AI"), and got banned for the mere suggestion.
So yeah, I understand AI hate, oh do I. Keep shitting on Altman an AI bros. But anyone (like this guy) who wants to bury open weights AI: you are digging your own graves.
Damn, I had no idea the Game UI DB guy was so based. Huge respect from me.
Oh boy here we go downvotes again
regardless o the model you're using, the tech itself was developed and fine-tuned on stolen artwork with the sole purpose of replacing the artists who made it
that's not how that works. You can train a model on licensed or open data and they didn't make it to spite you even if a large group of grifters are but those aren't the ones developing it
If you're going to hate something at least base it on reality and try to avoid being so black-and-white about it.
Tools have always been used to replace humans. Is anyone using a calculator a shitty person? What about storing my milk in the fridge instead of getting it from the milk man?
I don't have an issue with the argument, but unless they're claiming that any tool which replaced human jobs were unethical then their argument is not self consistent and thus lacks any merit.
Edit:
notice how no one has tried to argue against thisPeople have begun discussing it, although i suppose it was an unfair expectation to have this discussion here. Regardless, after i originally edited this, you guys did have tons of discussions with me. I do appreciate it, and it seems that most of us support the same things. It kinda just seems like an issue with framing and looking at things in the now vs the mid term future.
I haven't heard of this before, but it looks interesting for game devs.
Game UI Database: https://www.gameuidatabase.com/index.php
I guess it is inevitable that self centred ego-stroking bubble communities appear in platforms such as Lemmy. Where reasoned polite discussion is discouraged and opposing opinions are drowned.
Well, I'll just leave this comment here in the hope someone reads it and realises how bad these communities actually are. There's a lot to hate about AI (specially companies dedicated to sell it), but not all is bad. As any technology, is about how you use it and this kind of community is all about cancelling everything and never advance and improve.
The general rule was it had to be 25 percent different. This is why AI cant directly copy an image. You may remember some horrendous boundary pushing of art in the 2000s like that artist who straight up blew up celebrity and media influencers instagram posts and sold massive photos of it directly without giving the influencer/celebrity a cent. Avril Lavinge's ex published her song lyric notes and won the case against her. Copyright has always been awful. The Marvin Gaye estate is notorious for bluffing that his IP is stolen, but music can legally sample 6 seconds of any song or sound without permission. Robin Thickes song was completely different and when that family is hard up they go after another obscure artist. Dont be swayed. If its original its original. Not like Selena Photos Y Recueredos and Back on the Chain Gang by the Pretenders, that one was blatant. And all she did was change the lyrics back in the 80s. Copyright changes, but you are protected just like the big guys. Don't be afraid to create, you'll be missing out on experience. Copy dont wory about originality just make art. Trust me I couldnt paint more than a stroke for years because of fear of being a copycat and infringing and unoriginal. Just copy copy until you have your own style. I promise it will come. Its impossible for two people to play the moonlight sonata exactly the same. I was friends with an Oxford music professor. He can tell anyone by the way they play a piano. The nuances are always going to show. You're too original, you're not a robot. Even 3d printers never print the same piece the same because of environmental factors.
All you need to know is change your art 25 percent from the original. Even if it is color choice, and anything you publish online is automatically protected in American courts. It doesn't matter if you copy AI. If its 25 percent different its yours. Also I;ll remind you that AI legally cannot duplicate images to infringe on copyright. Thats why all images look slightly off. The nuances are set with parameters partially to keep it legal. If courts find it is copy beyond artistic expression, then in comes the hammers and bats to the ai server stacks. Serious.
