As AI developers indiscriminately suck up online content to train their models, artists are seeking ways to fight back.

Data poisoning: how artists are sabotaging AI to take revenge on image generators::As AI developers indiscriminately suck up online content to train their models, artists are seeking ways to fight back.

  • Ilovethebomb@lemm.eeEnglish
    165·
    10 months ago

    Yeah, no. There’s a difference between posting your work for someone to enjoy, and posting it to be used in a commercial enterprise with no recompense to you.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.worldEnglish
      47·
      10 months ago

      How are you going to stop that lol it’s ridiculous. Would you stop a corporate suit from viewing your painting because they might learn how to make a similar one? It’s makes absolutely zero sense and I can’t believe delulus online are failing to comprehend such simple concept of “computers being able to learn”.

      • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.worldEnglish
        63·
        10 months ago

        Ah yes, just because lockpickers can enter a house suddenly everyone’s allowed to break and enter. 🙄

      • BURN@lemmy.worldEnglish
        37·
        10 months ago

        Computers can’t learn. I’m really tired of seeing this idea paraded around.

        You’re clearly showing your ignorance here. Computers do not learn, they create statistical models based on input data.

        A human seeing a piece of art and being inspired isn’t comparable to a machine reducing that to 1’s and 0’s and then adjusting weights in a table somewhere. It does not “understand” the concept, nor did it “learn” about a new piece of art.

        Enforcement is simple. Any output from a model trained on material that they don’t have copyright for is a violation of copyright against every artist who’s art was used illegally to train the model. If the copyright holders of all the training data are compensated and have opt-in agreed to be used for training then, and only then would the output of the model be able to be used.