Raw LLM Responses

I think all these complaints are missing the point, it's not the technology's capabilities that's the issue, it's how people are using it. It's correct that forgery has always been wrong, and if people are using AI merely to copy artists work and sell it, then it's wrong. I can also go into a gallery, take a photo of a painting, sell it online, and that would also be wrong. Photography has the same implications. Why does music have a double standard? It's because most cases are holding companies seeking rent. Disclaimers have little to do about protecting artists and everything to do with avoiding predatory litigation. Consider how much music we listen today is sampled. Folks are posting entire albums on youtube with other peoples' music. Think about the website whosampled, it's a whole website dedicated to attributing artists work after the fact it's been sampled. The issue isn't that people sample other people's music, the issue is when it's done purely to make money, and with no attribution. Honestly I never would have heard of, or seen Sam's art if it wasn't for people using his name in prompts. I've learned about dozens of amazing and talented artists that I never would have seen before if I hadn't studied other peoples' prompts. Think about how many folks who were never interested in visual art before, now know who Greg Rutkowski and Peter Mohrbacher are. It encourages people to become familiar with past and current artists. My main point is, the technology isn't really the issue, it's how people are using it, and in that respect I think that's where our efforts should be focused. We should be calling out people for using it merely to make money or directly exploiting a single artist's style. People should try their best to give attribution, so if I use samdoesart as a token, I should say it's in the style of Sam Yang. This is what everyone should be encouraging, because in reality we all benefit from more recognition, especially from non-artists. I think defining spaces as Non-AI-Art is perfectly valid too. People should be clear and honest if they've produced something purely with machine learning and label their art as AI generated, just like they would say, painted with watercolor, or digital painting. In the end, I think attacking the technology is misguided since there are already so many tools that pose the same risks. Instead of wasting energy throwing the baby out with the bath water, we should be concentrating on folks that are using it inappropriately.