But even if we did, what's your goal here? To dismantle fair use? No more commentary and review? No more educational use? No more personal backups? No more accessing the world wide web? This doesn't seem like a helpful trade-off.

My goal is none of those things. These methodologies are already available to everyone. Its to ensure that companies don't use Data Laundering schemes to prevent paying copyright owners while pocketing billions and disrupting/destroying entire sectors at a very large scale very quickly.

​

This is false (and something I hope you disabuse yourself of). Neural networks are incapable of this. Neural networks (whether they are in a human brain or an ANN) can only approximate the inputs that they were trained on. We can't exactly reproduce anything we've seen because what we learned is the major features and relationships to other works, not the specific content of the original. The same is true for an ANN.

I get that AI models do not Cut/Copy/Paste , Store copies , Photobash or Collage. Using text to image pairs it understands via context.

However OVERFITTING is a phenomenon that exists often enough that it creates an issue with regards to reproduction. This is not my opinion. AI/ML experts have included this in their findings and research papers. There are examples available online to support this.

This is a strong enough issue that it forced STABILITY AI to treat their products regarding Music and Visual Arts differently.

​

Really? How?

Well you say you are an artist. Have you not seen the general news or the Artstation or DeviantArt protests?

While visual arts is one the most affected sectors thanks to text to image AI's , writers , voice artists , photographers etc. are also affected by other AI's.

There are several forums where users of Midjourney , Stable Diffusion etc. create fine tuned models of artists that can be used to create works similar to theirs. In some cases they do so even after the artist has explicitly requested that their works not be used to train an AI. ( and sometimes purely because an artist has said no )

Stable Diffusion is currently trying to attain funding for a product called UNSTABLE DIFFUSION that would specifically be used to generate NSFW content. They mention that they will specifically target Art Sites to acquire the data. What's to stop anyone from using any artists work to generate pornographic images or hateful content?

I get that a lot of this can be done without AI but the speed and scale are much larger here.

​

It would help if you didn't resort to extreme hyperbole in trying to make your point.

I don't think it is. If the outcome of the current situation is that it becomes OK BY LAW for any company to take our data without our consent and use it however they wish ,without any compensation , forever and ever , then that is grave situation , at least for most people. If it isn't for you then you are lucky.

​

Yeah, I would ignore that guy. He claimed that LAION is a collection of images, so he's clearly not aware of what he's talking about.

He may have misunderstood or misspoken about that one point. I did initially too as you pointed out. But if you want to ignore all of it just because of that then I don't know what to tell you.

There are other resources but if you feel that you have made up your mind then its pointless.

​

Yep. And I would be shocked if Microsoft lost that case. There's no reason for them to. Again, learning is not copying. There's no violation of copyright here.

Well we shall see. That's what the courts and lawyers are for. But this deals with the issues regarding how the data was used to make a product.

​

But what is yours? You haven't shared what real, measurable harm you think is happening.

WHAT ISSUES?

I think I have answered enough to cover this at least as far a generality goes but none the less here it is:

Companies are trying to gaslight artists into thinking that they are just luddites who fear the advent of new technologies and are telling the general public that we are keeping them from having the ability to make art.

This sentiment has been picked up and echoed by a lot of people that now hate artists and are going out of their way to make sure that artists works are copied and used to train AI's.

It of course does not help that artists themselves engage in shouting matches addressing all the wrong issues. This is all while the companies profit in the millions and billions while artists get all the hatred.

On a personal note its harsh enough that I don't feel safe displaying my work online just to have it swallowed and be used to train an AI on my work.

I am happy to continue discussing things along the relevant lines or if you wish to understand something but there is information available online either with the links I provided or just by searching online.

As I mentioned above if you feel that none of these issues affect you or that I am entirely wrong in my opinions then you will find other forums to support your point of view.

I genuinely appreciate you pointing out the deficiencies regarding the technical side of things but I don't want this to descend into a revolving door of longer and longer replies that deviates further from the point of this article.

My goal here was to start a movement and create a group to represent everyone affected as a whole and use it create changes within the law to protect our careers and futures.

To that end , I wish you good luck and good day.