• madjo@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

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

    • ReCursing@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 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

    • WaitThisIsntReddit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 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?

    • oplkill@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 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
        0
        ·
        13 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
          0
          ·
          13 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
            0
            ·
            13 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?