this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024
30 points (100.0% liked)

chat

8168 readers
175 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

so, background, I'm currently workshopping a Disco Elysium/Touhou Project fusion fanfic (Disco concept, Gensokyo setting) and, since I already pay for NovelAI for recreational purposes, I figured I'd generate some character/skill portraits for it to accentuate the presentation of it.

Here's some of the better ones as of yet, alongside the one in the thumbnail.

However, I am conflicted on actually using them.

I figured I'd outsource the question because I've been thinking about it for a week and am no closer to resolving the internal contradiction. Here's what I've been thinking thus far:

Concerns: I have moral concerns about the scraping and the 'ask-for-forgiveness-not-permission' philosophy that is central to these major generative models. I also think, in the context of it's use within the hands of the bourgeoisie, AI is used as a tool of displacement and discipline. I also know that there is generally a negative perception of people who use AI image generation, for mostly valid reasons as most self-proclaimed 'AI artists' are coomers/techbros who make it a mission to discredit and disparage human artists. Even though I don't fall into this category, I'm worried that I'd open up a vector of harassment where there otherwise wouldn't be one if I include them, and I don't want to deal with that.

Benefits: It adds to the vibes of the fic, and I think there's a tangible enhancement with adding visuals to it. I also like what I've output so far.

Caveats: I don't plan to make money off of this. I don't have the disposable income to commission portraits for what ultimately is a fanwork that I don't plan to profit off of and don't have enough investment in to sink money into. The concerns are specifically what are holding me back in adding them, because it would be nice to add a visual component.

I just wanted to get a vibe check on here for this use case. Want to see if it will help me resolve the internal contradiction I've tangled myself in shrug-outta-hecks


edit: I'll err on the side of caution and drop the visual aspect of it, thanks for the feedback

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I don't plan to make money off of this

Then there's nothing to feel bad about IMO.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

Nah I get it, even if you're not making money off of it I understand feeling weird about using bootleg versions of other people's creativity.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

People should feel bad using something that requires stolen art to function

[–] [email protected] 27 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

downbear Generative AI is a labor issue, not a property issue, except as it pertains to the models themselves which as they seek to enclose all of human culture should themselves be public domain and owned by all.

The easiest way to prove this is this simple thought experiment: if a major corporation, say Disney, could have a model produced exclusively with material it owned or otherwise licensed for the explicit purpose of model training, would that it make it ok for that model to then be used in their animation studios or licensed out to other studios? And the answer is a resounding no: it doesn't matter that they own the property involved, because the harm the model is doing is to skilled labor. So clearly the question of property is just a diversion that keeps the discourse within boundaries that are favorable to huge corporations who can easily own all they need.

That's why my stance has been and remains that generative AI should be a copyright poison pill: the models should be public domain even if trained on licensed art, the direct outputs of them should be public domain, works that include them should be public domain including the parts that aren't AI generated, and as an extra penalty all the IP within a work containing generative AI should become public domain as well. So if, say, Disney were to use some generative AI in a Star Wars movie, not only should that movie become public domain but the entire Star Wars IP should as well, along with all the Disney trademarks they toss in in splash screens at the front just because fuck them.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think that's a fundamental misunderstanding of how generative models work and what stealing is