At what line does it become stolen property? There are plenty of tools which artists use today that use AI. Those AI tools they are using are more than likely trained on some creation without payment. It seems the data it’s using isn’t deemed important enough for that to be an issue. Google has likely scraped billions of images from the Internet for training on Google Lens and there was not as much of an uproar.
Honestly, I’m just curious if there is an ethical line and where people think it should be.
At what line does it become stolen property? There are plenty of tools which artists use today that use AI. Those AI tools they are using are more than likely trained on some creation without payment. It seems the data it’s using isn’t deemed important enough for that to be an issue. Google has likely scraped billions of images from the Internet for training on Google Lens and there was not as much of an uproar.
Honestly, I’m just curious if there is an ethical line and where people think it should be.
Well see, it shaves off a fraction of the creative work’s statistical signal, and deposits it into this vector database that we created…
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Well see, it shaves off a fraction of the creative work’s statistical signal, and deposits it into this vector database that we created…
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.