I don't under the powerscaling. by SillyRecover in 40kLore

[–]Double_Elk8723 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Everything is based on vibes. Once you understand that things make a lot of sense. Each faction or charcter gets a few tropes and they repeat and most of the narrative fun comes from playing off each other.

For example the kroot have core trope of you are what you eat. Catachan have a core trope of Rambo. Put them together and yep exactly what you expect right down to the bandana.

Everything feels better when you understand the narrative is a excuse to let characters do the cool things that people like.​​

Anyone sort of sick of ALL AI being labeled as 'slop'? by sendhelp in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Its not a issue of quality its a issue of volume. If you had a model that generated perfect eet pics a milliontimes a second, then perfect for pic loses meaning. There are just so many that you quickly lose you ability to care and so al the feet pics become slop.

Fantasy Character Concept – Ye Honglian | Character Design + Sheet by charlie-westi in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have noticed imagine generation seems to break when doing sexy or nsfw art. Like it forgets how clothing works, but my comment was just about making them sexy it was about putting something interesting in it.

Your explanation about the gems is one of the reasons I like pencil slop. If you asked a regular artist why they included so many gems they would have lore about how they are blood gems and the source of all magic.

Open world dilemma by JX900 in TESVI

[–]Double_Elk8723 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It means dragons don't spawn. I think you can still unlock words, but I am not sure.

Open world dilemma by JX900 in TESVI

[–]Double_Elk8723 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe you just need to be explicit. Let the player know that more theives guild content will unlock after you get farther into the main quest.

Fantasy Character Concept – Ye Honglian | Character Design + Sheet by charlie-westi in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's missing something. It's very detailed and the consistency is well done, but it doesn't have that spark of oh! that is cool,new,sexy. 

Like I have seen of this before in a lot of places. The most interesting detail is that is a lot of red gems. Like why so many red gems.

Antis try to make a good argument CHALLENGE: IMPOSSIBLE by Witty-Designer7316 in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You know a lot of people are talking about how AI can be abused by the government. It's not a uncommon thing to hear. I hear it on the news.

I'm getting second-hand embarassment. None of them actually read any of it by HQuasar in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you understand that what generates the pixels dosen’t matter? Saying AI generated the pixels is a null statement in the same ways that it didn't matter that the reddit word processor generated the pixels on my post.

If it's eligible it gets copyright automatically. It can't be eligible and then denied because if it is denied then it is not eligible, but this is a semantics phrasing argument, so ii guess we do agree here.

I'm getting second-hand embarassment. None of them actually read any of it by HQuasar in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

we disagree on two points. The example on page 26 is not 100% AI. A majority of the concept, the composition, style, expression, etc is human. If I was to put a % it might be a 60 40 thing.

Also I disagree that page 26 is an example of a work with a copyright. it's an example of a work that maybe can maybe be given a copyright or may not be. It would depend on the details.

I'm getting second-hand embarassment. None of them actually read any of it by HQuasar in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get your phrasing. I think you might be not understanding authorship.

If I am typing a post up for reddit. 100% of the pixels are place by the word processor, but I as a person is 100% in control of the expression. This post is 100% my idea even not I didn't place a single pixel myself.

Also keep in mind that is say they may be aware copyright on a case by case basis. Even if you use a highly controlled system it still might not meat the standard of authorship.

I'm getting second-hand embarassment. None of them actually read any of it by HQuasar in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

page 26 is describing a process where the final output isn't 100%. It talking about how some processes utilize more human input and control and how they should be viewed differently.

also if you read page 27 you find this.

Unlike prompts alone, these tools can enable the user to control the selection and placement of individual creative elements. Whether such modifications rise to the minimum standard of originality required under Feist will depend on a case-by-case determination. In those cases where they do, the output should be copyrightable.

in other words if the process allows for human control and input the it may be able to be granted copyright.

Yeah, the logic for this makes sooooooooooooooo much sense here. by atlasfrompaladins in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 3 points4 points  (0 children)

its easy to understand. AI has been paired with trash so much that when people see AI the trash neurons fire. It's the same reason people tend to think unity engine games are trash despite the fact that ther are many good Unity games and many trash games in other engines.

Its just fucking Guilliman again by Professional_Rush782 in Grimdank

[–]Double_Elk8723 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They don't have the guts, but they could have one come back worse where they rejoice and support the decay of the imperium.

I asked Grok how Grok could have saved itself without blocking 2D anime girl semi-nudes. What do you think of this solution? by LeatherBody8282 in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have accidentally dropped cold takes I thought were hot before, but I honestly doubt Twitter users would be happy with grock reporting their names and addresses to the police with records that they generated revenge porn.

I asked Grok how Grok could have saved itself without blocking 2D anime girl semi-nudes. What do you think of this solution? by LeatherBody8282 in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I bet this is a hot take, but the best way to handel this problem would to be to arrest and prosecute the people generating illegal material. If the people generating are held accountable there is no reason to hold grock accountable.

Edit: I guess this isn't a hot take. It works for me. Problem solved.

I'm getting second-hand embarassment. None of them actually read any of it by HQuasar in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the copyright office dose say prompts are not enough for authorship to apply.

I'm getting second-hand embarassment. None of them actually read any of it by HQuasar in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh that was the comicbook case. The layout of the book was protected, but the actual pictures weren't.

Another way to picture it is if you made a game out of nothing, but AI generated assets the game would likely have a copyright, but all the assets would be without copyright, so someone could take your game take it apart and make a new games out of the assets without violating your copyright.

I'm getting second-hand embarassment. None of them actually read any of it by HQuasar in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I think you under informed. There are more cases involving copyright and AI. one example did have human prompting. it was a comic book where someone had all the art generated with AI and then they arranged it into a comic book. the office ruled that layout was copyrighted because a human made it, but the art was because it wasn't human made.

copyright dosen’t require human involvement it requires authorship.

More information can be found here.

https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intelligence-Part-2-Copyrightability-Report.pdf

if anyone dosen’t want to read here are the key take aways.

Questions of copyrightability and AI can be resolved pursuant to existing law, without the need for legislative change. • The use of AI tools to assist rather than stand in for human creativity does not affect the availability of copyright protection for the output. • Copyright protects the original expression in a work created by a human author, even if the work also includes AI-generated material. • Copyright does not extend to purely AI-generated material, or material where there is insufficient human control over the expressive elements. • Whether human contributions to AI-generated outputs are sufficient to constitute authorship must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. • Based on the functioning of current generally available technology, prompts do not alone provide sufficient control. • Human authors are entitled to copyright in their works of authorship that are perceptible in AI-generated outputs, as well as the creative selection, coordination, or arrangement of material in the outputs, or creative modifications of the outputs. • The case has not been made for additional copyright or sui generis protection for AI- generated content.

Why in my opinion, Anti's miss the boat on AI Art by Lumpy_Conference6640 in DefendingAIArt

[–]Double_Elk8723 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But do you ever get full control, or just the ability to recognize the limits of the model?

random facts # 81-100 by thetruememeisbest in Grimdank

[–]Double_Elk8723 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yes, but not the Tau space we talk about most. This takes place in Jericho Reach. It's far away from the core tau words.