• madjo@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    Let’s not. Generative AI is bad for environment, it’s also using stolen assets.

    • WaitThisIsntReddit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      4 days ago

      Every artist that ever saw another person’s art is “using stolen assets” then. Why is training a meat neural network more valid?

    • ReCursing@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      No it isn’t, the lack of renewables feeding into the energy grid is the problem, not AI - direct your ire in the right direction. Also no it doesn’t unless you completely redefine theft to me not theft - nothing is taken, no-one is denied access to existing things, and no copies are made

    • oplkill@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      but what about self trained on paid data(with allowed authors) and used on local pc?

      • madjo@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        If you have the money for that, why not just hire those allowed authors and artists to make the art for you?

        • oplkill@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          its like to tell somebody: if you have moneys for self cooking food why dont order it from professionals

          • madjo@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            No it’s not. If you have paid for data to self train AI, you have paid artists already. Why use the AI slop, when you can use the actual work you purchased?

    • OfCourseNot@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      Not quite… I mean depending on what you’re comparing it to. Like if you compare it to a person doing it—breathing, eating, space(home, office…), electricity…—the Ilm is much more efficient. Now a random person that wouldn’t have produced any image, text, song… whatever, that is now generating a hundred of them a day is, indeed, very wasteful and bad for the environment.

      For comparison, the co2 emissions from training gpt3 were equivalent to 1250 people’s breathing for a year.

      Now about the stealing part, I’m not very fond of ‘intellectual property’ very much myself, nor am I very respectful of it, so I will not discuss it.