As an artist I am concerned about AI image generation

Title should be more like, artists concerned about Stable Diffusion AI model that makes images look human-made.

It also apparently copies the artist’s logo.

In a way, the “it just does what humans do but faster” argument is starting to follow the “a number can’t be illegal” trajectory.

Either way I support AI art and AI in other fields. Just because artists are mad it's gonna take their jobs does not seem like a legitimate reason to halt human progress. It's just inevitable the way things are going.

Stealing people’s work to serve as your training set is not human progress.

Sounds like the AI model should be paying royalties to every affected artist for the right to sample their work.

The art that was trained on was all Creative Commons apparently, so perhaps artists should understand licenses first before giving their work a permissive license.

All CC licenses, other than the “CC0 public domain dedication”, require attribution, but CC themselves have taken what I’d consider to be an ass-backwards position on the matter:

> At CC, we believe that, as a matter of copyright law, the use of works to train AI should be considered non-infringing by default, assuming that access to the copyright works was lawful at the point of input.

https://creativecommons.org/2021/03/04/should-cc-licensed-co...