this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2025
1036 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

68305 readers
5126 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 179 points 1 week ago (41 children)

So was it trained on his work without his approval?

[–] undeffeined@lemmy.ml 105 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

That should be the headline. Assuming it was done without consent, which lets face it, it most likely was.

Edit: It came to my attention that Japan has a more open stance to AI training on copyright materials. It does however say that

Accordingly, the focus is that ingestion of copyrighted material is prohibited if the intention is to output products that can be perceived as creative expressions of copyrighted works, including mimicking the style of specific creators.

Not a laywer but all these memes created by the ChatGPT look like creative expressions that mimic the style.

Read more here

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 63 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The way Altman whines about how much he should be allowed to steal people's work to feed his bottom line, I have no doubt whatsoever that this is the case.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

These people from the Silicon Valley see themselves as the saviours of mankind (look up Longtermism in Silicon Valley). Within their structure of believe anything is within reason as long as it serves the greater good. That includes anything from obviously breaking the law to outright genocide, which we see in action right now.

Of course since their moral code is already eroded to its core there are no boundaries, like "I shouldn't molest other people"…

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] devfuuu@lemmy.world 69 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Like all other AI and all the copyright in the world. Shareholders are ok with. Copyright for me, not for you. Pirates were the bad guys. These are the saviours we deserve.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 45 points 1 week ago

Seems this is legal now. Keep this in mind, when the next video game decompilation project comes along because that's also machine-generated material based on copyrighted released media. That must be equally as legal now.

load more comments (38 replies)
[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 126 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Miyazaki is my favorite angry old man.

[–] Flemmy@lemm.ee 32 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Life is hard when you dreamed of being a chèf but got popular with animation.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

Yeah it sucks for him to have ended up creating works beloved by hundreds of millions and touched and changed lives

he could have made some steaks and shit but oh well

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 69 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The funny thing is OpenAI's image generator didn't really do a good job with making a Ghibli stylized version of Altman.

That being said, there will be a downstream impact on media quality if there is no novel approach to balancing creative work and AI slop generators. Don't think there is a simple answer.

[–] skvlp@lemm.ee 77 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Replacing amazing creative humans with bland AI generated content is not a good use of AI.

[–] heavydust@sh.itjust.works 37 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Ironic since the decrease of human made work (art or software) will decrease the quality or diversity of generative AI itself

[–] devfuuu@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Which the shareholders couldn't freaking care less. They only need to get super rich in their lifetime.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 65 points 1 week ago (24 children)

Next you're going to tell me using someones artstyle to depict someone getting deported is not appropriate for the white house twitter

load more comments (24 replies)
[–] filister@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago (13 children)

The bigger problem here is the loss of jobs and we are talking about a huge loss of employment that will affect economies really hard. The future looks more and more bleak.

[–] daddy32@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago (11 children)

I don't know about you, but I don't absolutely require job for my life. I do require nutrients and shelter though...

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago (6 children)

The bigger problem here is the loss of jobs and we are talking about a huge loss of employment that will affect economies really hard.

I would say that's a tangential problem. Because, you know, in theory...

But the deeper problem is ultimately in expertise as a learned skill developed over time and through practice. If you're de-skilling work, you're dismantling the tools by which we train the next generation of artists and production crews. If we were just replacing humans with machines for some route manual labor (like Pixar replaced Disney's old hand drawn animations with a newer CGI look), the result would be a new style and perhaps less tendentious from route reproductions.

But we're gutting the whole process of development which means you're losing the pool of skilled professionals who know how to create CGI (or even flip-book style 60s animation) from first principles. That means sacrificing whole fields of specialized expertise for... what? This?

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

"A real labor of love"

Christ. It's like people cosplaying as real artists.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 12 points 1 week ago (4 children)

That will only happen if a society completely is reorganized to get rid of money or if they introduce universal basic income (at a rate that actually allows people to live).

Realistically I can't see either of those things happening.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] deathbird@mander.xyz 36 points 1 week ago

See this is the (well, one major) problem with copyright.

Imaginary property for me ("AI" goons), not for thee (actual artists).

[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 29 points 1 week ago

Unfathomably based

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago (13 children)

Ya. These are the same people that continually try to take down Team Four Star for their satirization of DBZ because it made is actually better in many ways, from a country that has some of the worst satire and free use laws in the world.

Creators of copyrighted material in Japan can literally sue someone from making fun of their material.

Pardon me if I don't take their crocodile tears seriously.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›