←back to thread

DeviantArt upsets artists with its new AI art generator, DreamUp

(arstechnica.com)
125 points akeck | 3 comments | 13 Nov 22 02:33 UTC | HN request time: 0.651s | source
Show context
ta8645 ◴[13 Nov 22 06:01 UTC] No.33580501[source]▶
Artists are no different than all the people who tried to destroy the cotton gin or the automated loom. We're all going to have to live in a world where these technologies exist, and find a way to live a fulfilling life regardless. Just as chess players today enjoy the game even though computers have surpassed our chess abilities.

It seems odd to complain that computers are using human's artwork to inspire their own creations. Every human artist has done the exact same thing in their lifetime; it's unavoidable.

replies(10): >>33580588 #>>33580624 #>>33580644 #>>33580673 #>>33580687 #>>33580701 #>>33580722 #>>33580832 #>>33580867 #>>33582176 #
bugfix-66 ◴[13 Nov 22 06:30 UTC] No.33580624[source]▶
These systems aggregate and interpolate human work. Interpolation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation

It's like a very complicated form of linear interpolation:

  a*x + (1-a)*y
These systems do not "think". Today I spent all day mulling an idea, experimenting with variations, feeling frustrated or excited, imagining it, simulating it, making mistakes, following paths of reasoning, deducing facts, revisiting dead-ends with new insight, daydreaming, talking to my wife about it, etc. That's human thought.

These models do not "think" like a human, they do not dream or imagine or feel. They run a feed-forward system of linear equations (matrix multiplications).

They INTERPOLATE HUMAN WORK.

They don't exist without training data (huge amounts of intellectual property) aggregated and interpolated in a monstrous perversion of "fair use":

https://bugfix-66.com/7a82559a13b39c7fa404320c14f47ce0c304fa...

Starve the machine. Without your work, it's got nothing.

replies(2): >>33580684 #>>33581480 #
1. mkaic ◴[13 Nov 22 09:31 UTC] No.33581480[source]▶
Humans also interpolate human work. True originality is an illusion and all creative works are based on, inspired by, or contributed to by something else. Are you implying that human thought is required to create human-level art? Because if anything, I think AI-generated art is in the process of disproving this exact hypothesis. It is unnerving to realize that something we felt up til now was fundamentally exclusive to the human experience isn't actually exclusive, but it's becoming more and more apparent.
replies(2): >>33581994 #>>33582573 #
2. FridgeSeal ◴[13 Nov 22 11:14 UTC] No.33581994[source]▶
Humans on the whole aren't capable of hoovering up basically every piece of artist content accessible on the web, storing all of it, and then creating near-faithful reproductions at a moments notice.

It's a problem of scale.

> Because if anything, I think AI-generated art is in the process of disproving this exact hypothesis

But it's not creating anything, it's regurgitating it's training material (through a suitably fine blender) in the way that scores best. These models are nothing without the actual art they've appropriated.

3. throw_m239339 ◴[13 Nov 22 12:50 UTC] No.33582573[source]▶
> Humans also interpolate human work.

Humans, artists aren't the machines other human created, they interpret or copy, not interpolate.