• HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is what I never understood about the whole training on AI thing.

    When a human creates an artwork, they don’t do it out of a vacuum. They’ve had a lifetime of inspiration from artwork they’ve discovered that inspires then to create something wholly new. AI does the same thing

    • Dominic@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      AIs are trained for the equivalent of thousands of human lifetimes (if not more). There’s no precedent for anything like this.

    • luciole (he/him)@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The AIs we are talking about are large language models. They take human work as input and produce facsimiles. They are owned by individuals or companies that have no permission to exploit in this way intellectual property tied to other people’s livelihoods to copy them.

      LLMs are not sentient, they don’t have inspiration, they are not creative and therefore do not create in the sense an artist would. They are an elaborate mathematical equation.

      “Training” an AI has nothing to do with training an actual living being. It’s just tuning: adjusting an algorithm incrementally until the operator is satisfied with the result. I think it’s defendable to amount this form of extraction to plagiarism.