Honestly I don’t expect these kind of low quality comment in HN. Where’s your thinking?
If someone used AI and created something illegal(deepfake or whatever), can they claim it’s not their creation?
If someone used AI and created something illegal(deepfake or whatever), can they claim it’s not their creation?
A comment that opens a discussion is not low quality just because you disagree with it Mr 7 karma. There is always a degree of irony with such statements.
You choosing the toppings for your pizza and whether you want cheese in your crust does not mean you made the pizza. You did not make it, you merely ordered it.
A better metaphor would be:
A photocopier won’t copy documents by itself. If someone uses a machine to make a copy, they still made that exact copy. Whether that copy constitutes copyright infringement is a separate question.
Authorship still belongs to the user for AI outputs; their originality is debatable, though. These are two distinct concepts that people easily confuse.
Again, apply this reasoning to illegal AI-generated content: if humans are responsible for AI outputs, then they also have authorship of those outputs.
You’re denying another human’s authorship simply because they use a different tool from you.
Another angle you might argue is that you aren’t really “making” something unless you craft it directly. But then what about film directors, architects, or CEOs? Did they really make anything?
Again, you’re denying the role of human intention by gatekeeping the idea of “making” behind direct craft. That’s fine, but it’s a limited worldview.