Comment on Not everything needs to be Art

• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The fact that you can’t pin down most AI photos to a combination of existing art is proof that’s untrue. A random number generator can create unique numbers just like a human asked to write a list of random numbers.

  A random AI photo generator will create a unique work of art. Your claim was that it is a copyright violation to copy an art style.

  That a human can add meaning, and emotion to art is a question of quality. I never questioned that human art is higher quality.

  source

  • turtletracks@lemmy.zip ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I wish you understood how AI worked lol

    source

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      You don’t know how it works at a technical level. Neural net training on data isn’t copying images into a database for retrieval like you imagine.

      source
  • turtletracks@lemmy.zip ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    And a random number generator is not random lol. And I never claimed copying an art style is a copyright violation, stop putting words in my mouth. God you people are so fucking annoying to argue with, making shit up, ignoring any points, you don’t even understand how the thing works lol

    source

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Humans can’t generate random numbers either. For example people won’t repeat digits if asked to give a random sample despite that being possible.

      source