No it isn’t, the lack of renewables feeding into the energy grid is the problem, not AI - direct your ire in the right direction. Also no it doesn’t unless you completely redefine theft to me not theft - nothing is taken, no-one is denied access to existing things, and no copies are made
Let’s not. Generative AI is bad for environment, it’s also using stolen assets.
ReCursing@feddit.uk 1 day ago
oplkill@lemmy.world 1 day ago
but what about self trained on paid data(with allowed authors) and used on local pc?
madjo@feddit.nl 18 hours ago
If you have the money for that, why not just hire those allowed authors and artists to make the art for you?
oplkill@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
its like to tell somebody: if you have moneys for self cooking food why dont order it from professionals
madjo@feddit.nl 11 hours ago
No it’s not. If you have paid for data to self train AI, you have paid artists already. Why use the AI slop, when you can use the actual work you purchased?
WaitThisIsntReddit@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Every artist that ever saw another person’s art is “using stolen assets” then. Why is training a meat neural network more valid?
RandomVideos@programming.dev 16 hours ago
Because AI training and humans training are different
madjo@feddit.nl 11 hours ago
Unlike humans, GenAI has no imagination.