undefined | Better HN

0 pointsad404b8a372f2b93y ago0 comments

This is larger than publishers, this is every artist, film-maker, photographer, every writer, every engineer, anybody who has ever written or created something and shared it publicly is liable to have their work assimilated and an infinite amount of derivatives produced with no control over how they're used and by whom.

Comment generated with gpt-neox prompt: Comment about AI and data collection and generation and its pitfalls, expressing concern, emphasis on professions, emphasis on automation, written by Stephen King, creative writing, award winning, trending on reddit, trending on hacker news, written by Greg Rutkowski, written by Zola, written by Voltaire, written by authpor, written by moyix.

(Just kidding, it wasn't AI generated but you see my point.)

0 comments

mkaic3y ago

> anybody who has ever written or created something and shared it publicly is liable to have their work assimilated and an infinite amount of derivatives produced with no control over how they're used and by whom.

This has been the case ever since people started putting their art on the Internet publicly. The only difference is that now it's algorithms creating the derivatives, not people.

harry83y ago

Yeah before the internet it never happened and nobody knew just how damn cliched Bill Shakespeare's plays are. Every line of Hamlet's soliloquy! It's insane!

ROTMetro3y ago

Would we have Shakespeare's plays if he didn't make money? Which encourages better plays:

I write a play, and I can license theater companies to be able to perform it. Therefor better writers are attracted to the industry (instead of to say Ad Copywriting) and because of a higher level product, the industry thrives.

I can write a passion play that the local theater will perform. I will not generate enough income to live from my product. I will not generate income from licensing my production because there is no copyright and my scripts would just get stolen/distributed freely. The industry has less quality productions. The majority of productions have no reputation of quality.

ad404b8a372f2b9OP3y ago

This is not remotely the same, scale and barrier to entry matter. With stable diffusion I can pick any artist right now and create over 1000 derivative works by tomorrow morning in his style to the same degree of expertise with no training involved and no work required.

jstanley3y ago

That's good!

Acting like it's a bad thing is just ludditery.

3 more replies

bigiain3y ago

> The only difference is that now it's algorithms creating the derivatives, not people.

I see more of a difference than that.

I really don't care if a person makes a meme out of one of my Flickr photos I've shared publicly.

I'm much more grumpy at the idea that Facebook/Google/Microsoft using my Flickr photos and "giving away the AI automemes" as a way to further lock people into their walled gardens of surveillance capitalism.

(Not enough that I actually care enough to do anything about it. I have my Flickr account set to default to CC BY 2.0 for uploads, and I try reasonably hard to remember to lock that down to All Rights Reserved is I'm uploading pics of family or friends. But I don't lose sleep over any of it. I do sometime come across this pic of mine, which took on a life of it's own and is all over the internet, at least in coffee-related places, and wistfully wonder if I could have gotten more credit for it... https://flic.kr/p/sVHP9 )

authpor3y ago

this is larger than the arts. anybody has ever participated creatively in our culture understands that it's absolute bullshit to pretend we need money in order to want to contribute artistically.

we need money because food is for sale, because most of us do not own where we live hence we are forced (a priori) to come up with a whole lot of money every month or else you're out in the streets.

ksidudwbw3y ago

Learn to code! Oh wait...

ad404b8a372f2b9OP3y ago

Sure but unless you bring down capitalism people will still need to work to eat and most will want to use their hard-earned creative skills to make a living.

Not only that but being able to dedicate 8 to 10 hours a day to your craft for 40 years bring it to a level that you can't reach with casual practice.

9wzYQbTYsAIc3y ago

> Sure but unless you bring down capitalism people will still need to work to eat and most will want to use their hard-earned creative skills to make a living.

The concept of a UBI (universal basic income) isn’t inherently in conflict with capitalism. I believe that it is actually in coherence with the idea of Universal Human Rights, as defined by the UN in the 1940s.

Perhaps that would be the culmination of anything good about capitalism.

1 more reply

authpor3y ago

capitalism cannot be brought down. this one must fall on its own.

I consider France one of the best examples of capitalism https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1683661/paris-protests-...

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

mkaic3y ago

This has been the case ever since people started putting their art on the Internet publicly. The only difference is that now it's algorithms creating the derivatives, not people.

harry83y ago

Yeah before the internet it never happened and nobody knew just how damn cliched Bill Shakespeare's plays are. Every line of Hamlet's soliloquy! It's insane!

ROTMetro3y ago

Would we have Shakespeare's plays if he didn't make money? Which encourages better plays:

ad404b8a372f2b9OP3y ago

jstanley3y ago

That's good!

Acting like it's a bad thing is just ludditery.

3 more replies

bigiain3y ago

> The only difference is that now it's algorithms creating the derivatives, not people.

I see more of a difference than that.

I really don't care if a person makes a meme out of one of my Flickr photos I've shared publicly.

authpor3y ago

this is larger than the arts. anybody has ever participated creatively in our culture understands that it's absolute bullshit to pretend we need money in order to want to contribute artistically.

we need money because food is for sale, because most of us do not own where we live hence we are forced (a priori) to come up with a whole lot of money every month or else you're out in the streets.

ksidudwbw3y ago

Learn to code! Oh wait...

ad404b8a372f2b9OP3y ago

Sure but unless you bring down capitalism people will still need to work to eat and most will want to use their hard-earned creative skills to make a living.

Not only that but being able to dedicate 8 to 10 hours a day to your craft for 40 years bring it to a level that you can't reach with casual practice.

9wzYQbTYsAIc3y ago

> Sure but unless you bring down capitalism people will still need to work to eat and most will want to use their hard-earned creative skills to make a living.

Perhaps that would be the culmination of anything good about capitalism.

1 more reply

authpor3y ago

capitalism cannot be brought down. this one must fall on its own.

I consider France one of the best examples of capitalism https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1683661/paris-protests-...

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse