Hacker News Reader

Artists and photographers were never asked permission of their photos to be used to develop image AI yet they ended up doing so, it was built off theft and will continue to be build off theft by using user data from social media companies.

View on HN

Ah, someone who doesn't understand how this stuff works and is just unnecessarily mad. People posted that stuff on the internet, it's not retaining their property it's learning the nuances of it. So it's effectively me looking through someone's gallery then attempting to create something like their art. No, it doesn't create "perfect recreations" or "perfect stylized things of theirs" because the outputs frequently are only stylistically similar. I'm sure you could get something that looks like one of their original pieces out with some effort prompting and conditioning the output but haven't people been copying artwork for millenia? It's definitely not a new phenomenon and preventing people from using generative art isn't going to stop it.

Think Alex Grey vs Cameron Gray. Both amazing artists but looking at Cameron's work he clearly is inspired by Alex. Did he steal that? Does he deserve to be shutdown? Maybe he asked permission but is Alex Grey financially burdened by Cameron's existence?

Artists are just mad something can do cool stuff that allows people who haven't spent a decade practicing something to create what their minds imagine.

Why is requiring their permission a good thing to start with?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com