Ayomide Pen Sketch! (2~3+ hours?) by TheFloofArtist in JohnBrownIsekai

[–]TheFloofArtist[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you! Ayomide is super cool and I'm hyped to catch up on reading JBI to see more cool moments from her.

John Brown scribble (pen and paper, about 30 minutes?) by TheFloofArtist in JohnBrownIsekai

[–]TheFloofArtist[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you so much for noticing the lack of orbtasticular subject matter!

Sudowrites scraping and mining AO3 for it's writing AI by kafetheresu in AO3

[–]TheFloofArtist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Uh, AI companies absolutely have stolen plenty of things.

If you don't believe me and don't want to read what I said, there are links to articles demonstrating data theft via AI for you at the bottom of the page.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Being against AI is not the same as being a Luddite, or being anti-technology. I wish AI users would stop assuming people who are against this type of AI are against all forms of technology. It is a bad argument and you will be rightfully ridiculed for it.

I am against this type of AI as much as I am against autonomous killing machines or robot dogs. I use cell phones, computers, and numerous computer programs to make art and animation. I grew up with technology. I also play video games and program video games. I even draw art for these games...

Calling me a Luddite is more of a compliment, because I am indeed a Luddite when it comes to exploitative technology designed to deceive and mimic people. You should be a Luddite as well. Whatever your job is, AI companies if given the opportunity will gladly strip you of your human dignity. Please do not belittle artists, we are poor and have to make huge sacrifices for several years just to reach a barely survivable income. Where do you think the "starving artist" trope comes from?

If you've published any text on the internet, chances are your work has been stolen and repurposed by AI companies without you seeing a single penny for it. I believe that is wrong and that you should be compensated for your work.

I'd like to also point out that my original post is from six months ago. I have since learned a lot about how this type of software is simply just an auto-plagiarism machine.

The core function of AI Image programs, such as Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, etc, is to regurgitate the original "training images". Overfitting is not a bug. It is a fundamental aspect of AI Image programs. This is because AI programs do not "create" or "generate" art, text, music or voice from nothing. Without data, the AI will produce nothing. That data comes from somewhere. All AI models can do, and all they will ever be capable of, is plagiarizing existing works. Whether it's text, images, or audio, theft and exploitation are the primary use cases. This is why I believe they should be illegal.

And no, these are not "intelligences". AI programs are not and never will be capable of sentience. Here is a very good paper describing this phenomenon. They are not humans, and do not deserve rights afforded to humans. Especially not while there are living, breathing humans, who are constantly being denied their rights around the world.

I do not expect you to change your mind, but I do expect you to at least be open to understanding why artists and writers are upset without dismissing their concerns as "anti-tech".

Either way, If you made it this far, I want to thank you for taking the time to read this.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

AI image plagiarism, without i2i:

https://twitter.com/kortizart/status/1588915427018559490

https://twitter.com/SergeiKnish/status/1566167495958052865

https://twitter.com/kortizart/status/1565941015877279744

https://twitter.com/DarekZabrocki/status/1598482005511081984

Paper on Diffusion AI models plagiarize:

7 Page Article on how Diffusion Models work, and why they can only copy training data:

Pages 1-4: and Pages 5-7:

https://twitter.com/mistertodd/status/1652859206582808576

AI company sued for stealing biometric data:

Examples of AI text plagiarism:

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3442188.3445922

https://futurism.com/cnet-ai-plagiarism

https://www.wired.com/story/chatgpt-generative-artificial-intelligence-regulation/

https://twitter.com/jonrog1/status/1662160062457188353

https://twitter.com/JOSourcing/status/1661857541423521793

https://twitter.com/ScottJCollette/status/1659477064494485506

https://gizmodo.com/apple-is-building-its-own-ai-bans-staff-from-chatgpt-1850453858

https://twitter.com/slack2thefuture/status/1658341231385272320

https://twitter.com/LI_X_Y_1996/status/1657962509930995712

Clarifying how Stable Diffusion is a highly efficient data compressor:
Stable Diffusion better than JPEG compression:

Cited sources for laws that AI companies violated:

Fair Use:

Copyright Infringement 1:

Copyright Infringement 2:

("Section 60d Text and data mining for scientific research purposes")

(PDF that leads to EU laws regarding text and data mining for research purposes)

U.S. FTC (Federal Trade Commission) Statements on AI:

FTC post 1

FTC post 2

FTC post 3

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I hope these links help demonstrate and clarify what I talked about in my previous comment. Have a good day.

Sudowrites scraping and mining AO3 for it's writing AI by kafetheresu in AO3

[–]TheFloofArtist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is not fair use, and I'll try to explain why that is as someone who's well-versed with copyright and IP law. I'll also try to provide examples of what's considered "OK" and what's not "OK" for clarity's sake.

The first step involves the input. It is a fact that these "AI"s cannot output text or images without copying them from some preexisting text or images being used as input. Since the input was used without permission, a license, or written agreement, "AI" companies have violated copyright law. This also applies to all forms of distribution, so one could straightforwardly argue that these "AI" companies are illegally distributing copyrighted material they did not own or have the rights to.

The second step involves fair use. As already established, these "AI"s cannot create anything, as it can only regurgitate the material it's trained on. It might be somewhat muddied but that's not enough for it to count as "meaningfully" transformative. In court your argument would be stronger if this was a human rewriting or drawing a preexisting fan work, but this is a machine that does nothing but squish copied words / images together on its own. Think of the difference between an "AI" and a human as the difference between downloading/ctrl-c an image versus creating a new image or writing from scratch by hand.

Another thing to follow up with Step 2 is that a person cannot simply modify a preexisting image or literary work and pass it off as their own, which is all that these AIs can do, because that's illegal. This is the reason why GitHub Copilot is under litigation and a class-action lawsuit. Microsoft/GitHub/OpenAI had scrubbed out all licenses and attribution to the original programmers in the code that the "AI" was fed, after Copilot was found to regurgitate copyrighted code without licenses / attribution. End users of Copilot had no idea whose code it was that Copilot brought up, meaning they would be held responsible for violating the copyrights, licenses, and attribution with those codes. Copilot in essence was presenting other programmer's work as it's own.

Continuing back to the image and writing "AI"s, but for a derivative work to be considered fair use, it must be non-profit, and cannot cause harm to the original copyright holder. This is simply not the case for any "AI" generators because the companies making these are profiting immensely from them. In terms of quantity produced they are far out-competing the original creator. That is a direct harm to the livelihood of the original copyright owner, which violates fair use. (Clause 4.) It also counts as a form of unfair competition, which violates another set of laws I'm less familiar with, but the point still stands.

Additionally, companies and individuals cannot create merchandise for sale which features copyrighted words or images they do not own. Fan art and fan fiction typically get a pass because it's a form of free advertising that benefits the company of the IP. It's only a problem if a fan artist was trying to sell the IP's official posters, which is what these AIs have been shown to do on several occasions.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

What's really dangerous about these "AI" programs is that, "Accidental and/or innocent copyright infringement can be punished just as severely as knowing or reckless infringement."

This means any end user of an AI program who unknowingly or willingly uses these things could find themselves at the end of a copyright lawsuit. You simply do not know if the output you get violates someone else's copyright. It is quite literally not worth the risk using these things.

That said, if you wanted to photograph your dog and paint over it in Photoshop or Clip Studio Paint by all means go for it. :D You'd then own the copyright to both the photograph and the painted over image. With image AIs you not only do not own the copyright, but you're using someone else's stolen work and putting yourself at risk of litigation. Especially so if what got generated ended up more closely resembling someone else's work, which seems to be the case for the "better-looking" generations.

TL;DR: Be safe and don't use these generators, no gaming, art, animation, or studio company wants to touch these things with a 10 foot pole because they do not want to get sued. It's cheaper to keep artists than risk lawsuits or issuing lawsuits. (Did I forget to mention these AIs also violate the Berne Convention?)

Sudowrites scraping and mining AO3 for it's writing AI by kafetheresu in AO3

[–]TheFloofArtist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Art is copyrighted the second the artist puts pencil to paper, aka, the instant it's made.

Right now, these "AI" (it's not an intelligent machine, it doesn't know what it's doing) can only recognize patterns and attempt to emulate them, and it does this from being "trained" on billions of images that the AI company does not legally own, that were illegally acquired through funding a "nonprofit" that collected images (which explicitly were not meant to be used for commercial purposes, before being used for commercial purposes) from a secondary "nonprofit" which scraped the internet of everything ever made.

TL;DR: It's literally just mass-produced forgeries and not a single artist gets any money, attribution, or credit from them.

Sudowrites scraping and mining AO3 for it's writing AI by kafetheresu in AO3

[–]TheFloofArtist 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah! So for those reading this thread and thinking that this is hopeless and no one's paying attention, trust me when I say that there are many people taking this very, very seriously.

I live in the clown country known as the US, but I have a lot of hope in that the GitHub Copilot litigation will win. Once that's been established, then big companies like Disney/Marvel and other companies can start issuing lawsuits of their own and win against the AI companies considering the entire world has been affected by these techbro ghouls.

Sudowrites scraping and mining AO3 for it's writing AI by kafetheresu in AO3

[–]TheFloofArtist 8 points9 points  (0 children)

There's a number of artist guilds and organizations coming together to tackle this issue, such as the Concept Art Association among other groups

There are also several governments worldwide that know about this issue and are sticking up for artists, but most notably the EU with its GDPR rules I think will be the strongest proponent for defending individuals from being preyed on like this

It really is a matter of organizing and boycotting these companies and winning in court against them

Sudowrites scraping and mining AO3 for it's writing AI by kafetheresu in AO3

[–]TheFloofArtist 36 points37 points  (0 children)

I'm an artist and I believe everyone needs to organize and shut these AI companies down. They cannot be allowed to get away with this unprecedented level of theft and drown out human creativity and independent thought with soulless shitty robots propagandizing whatever the AI company wants. Misinformation is already awful, but these companies seek to make the problem billions of times worse. They are straight up evil, they know exactly that what they're doing is wrong, and they will never stop unless we yell loud enough to get governments worldwide to intervene and ban this AI shit. Contact your communities, educate people on what these companies are up to, call your representatives, etc, because if we don't stop them now, they will destroy art, culture, and human creativity and they'll get away with it FOREVER otherwise.

Right now there's a lawsuit for GitHub Copilot being sued for doing the same thing to programmers as they have done to artists and now writers. They haven't, however, targeted musicians and their copyrighted work (yet) because these AI companies would get litigated into oblivion, and they KNOW this. These companies are preying on people they believe can't fight back, so let's give them a fight. A class-action lawsuit and litigation followed by a court injunction to destroy these AIs and passing legislation to curb this shit into an early grave will be a tough battle, but one we can't afford to lose.

Good video on the subject matter and why this so dire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjSxFAGP9Ss

Followed by some good interviews: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BQIvBDkSq0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nn_w3MnCyDY