191
AI Companies Take Hit as Judge Says Artists Have “Public Interest” In Pursuing Lawsuits
(www.hollywoodreporter.com)
this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
191 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
59219 readers
2821 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Out of curiosity, why do you say you're really pro AI? I feel like I'm stuck in an anti-AI bubble ATM.
For me, I just recognize that AI, or any technology isn't the problem. It's context it exists in, who gets to use it, and how.
We shouldn't have to choose between automating boring or dangerous jobs and letting people live dignified lives free from the fear of poverty. We shouldn't have to choose between having AIs that can generate all sorts of interesting media quickly (even if a lot of it isn't that good yet, it can still serve its purposes, like say, quickly mocking up an idea to see if it's worth going forward with it.) and ruining the livelihoods of the real artists that made it possible. We also shouldn't have to deal wit the mountain of garbage that will be created and shoved in our faces by corporations that don't understand what the limitations of the technology are.
These are all capitalism problems. We should probably do something about that instead of asking dumb questions like if AI can really make "art" or if it's copyright infringement.
Not parent, but because of the following reasons:
I think the issue with point 2 is that most of the people doing the work know that, but the people making decisions tend to not. We've seen time and time again that companies will absolutely ruin their future prospects for short terms profits. This isn't going to be an exception, and a lot of people that the companies can't actually afford to lose are going to get laid off.
If an AI tool helps your output by doing something intelligent for you that "enhances" the work but you didn't do the part the AI did - the AI doing something intelligent was a substitute for you doing something intelligent.
In the minimal a single skill loss is not significant to you producing output, but in the maximal none of your human skill is needed. AI will think of better prompts than you, or artists, to make cool art.