[ SECRET POST #6264 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6264 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Fandom: Tiān Guān Cì Fú/Heaven Official's Blessing
Ship: Beefleaf (Shi Qingxuan and He Xuan)]



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.
[Music, Drake/Kendrick Lamar beef, What's the Beef? Youtube channel]



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.
[X-Files s04e10, "Paper Hearts" ]



__________________________________________________



08.

































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 07 secrets from Secret Submission Post #895.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

But your work isn't being stolen. AI is not reproducing your work; it is building off of it to create new work. This is what humans do, and have always done, as well.

Interestingly, the conversation about humans doing it is nearly the same: despite the fact that we arrange art into genres and movements, tacitly acknowledging that we are often just copying and interating off of one another, we are also hypersensitive to the appearance of copying when it strikes a particular emotional chord. Creed "ripped off" Pearl Jam; JK Rowling "ripped off" The Worst Witch. '1899' had triangles and space travel in it, so the author of a graphic novel that also had triangles and space travel in it claims she's been plagiarized.

And in the background of it all, there are people arguing about IP law; getting mad that corporations like Disney lobby for more restrictive legislation, that fanworks (which arguably are true instances of "stealing") inhabit a legal gray zone and are shrouded in risk.

My feeling, at the end of the day, is that this is about people feeling protective of certain works (their own, and those to which they're otherwise emotionally attached) but lacking an actual overarching principle or understanding of how the creative process works. It's also a lot of people complaining about capitalism while wanting capitalism to work in their favor, i.e. compensating them for endeavors that wouldn't be compensated in a society that's needs based and removed from the market.

[luxshine]

There's absolutely no creative work in AI. A ton of artists have been trying to explain this to everyone. How the algorithm only recreates things based on the pixels it was fed, without any thought or learning because it CAN'T learn. It's programmed to to that, and without the work of humans, it's worthless.

Your analogy is wrong because, no matter my personal feelings about, say, the quality of JKRowling's writing and personal ethos, she didn't copy full paragraphs of The Worst Witch (And Books of Magic) to write Harry Potter. No matter how similar her work is to other previous work, it is still her writing, and her mistakes. AI takes the work and reproduces it, at times, verbatim. There was a HUGE scandal of an idiot programming an AI thing to reproduce the style of Kim Jung Gi not two weeks after his death, for example, and the thing was just doing that: copying Kim Jung Gi work and 'predicting' through programming how Jung Gi Would PROBABLY drawn a prompt. The thing is this: a Human copying and studying the work of Kim Jung Gi? Would also add their own experience to the work, and hopefully evolve into his own style. AI can't do that. It's not "Intelligence", it's a mathematical algorithm. And that mathematical algorithm was fed work that was stolen -bootleged if you prefer- from real human artists. Not, say, a hundred thousand "How to draw anime" books, studying the masters, trying to get WHY they put that pixel where they put it and reproducing it. Also, consider that a LOT of the people complaining ARE creatives themselves. In fact, MOST of the voices against AI are artists themselves. So the idea that we don't understand how "Creative process works" it's more than a bit insulting.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not as concerned by "AI" as most, because I know the first time an AI shill gets sued after realistic-looking AI CP is found on a child molester's computer, AI corps will get slapped down, real quick.

Also, AI doesn't build on anything. "AI" is not intelligent and can not create. It mimics. No more, no less.

It's kind of bizarre that you assign any kind of sophisticated thought to AI. AI isn't even AI. At best, it's a productivity tool. At worst, it's a grift; a hyped-up brand name for something that doesn't exist in reality.

Unless you meant something else? If so, you should probably clarify.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, one of the extra squicky extra shitty things about what AI artbots were trained on is that the datasets contained everything (text, art, photos...) they could steal off the internet. Including porn and CSEM and CSAM.

Actual humans were and are paid peanuts to wade through all the soul-destroying shit and put roadblocks on the (has no brain or ability to discern legality or morality) automatic image plagiarizers, to try and stop them becoming a PR nightmare neverending font of photorealistic CP and revenge porn trained on actual CSAM and actual revenge porn and actual random nudes.

It's bad enough that people are paid a pittance to try and stop humans posting real photos of real and simulated gore, CSAM, animal cruelty, racist brutality... and now shitheads can make more with a few words and the press of a button. I'm sure it's only a matter of time, if it hasn't already happened, before people being harassed online get sent AI fake photos/video of their own simulated sexual and/or violent assault.

And the only checks on this shit are that corporations backing/developing AI "art" engines might be sued for having shitty, badly enforced safeguards that don't cost them too much.

[(Anonymous)]

sorry but its already been used for that AND companies like Meta are being sued and oh look, AI corps are still here, not getting slapped down.