[brookst]

> If this AI worked without training, no one would say anything.

I don’t believe that for one second.

People are rightfully scared of professional and economic disruption. OMG training is just a convenient bit of rhetoric to establish the moral high ground. If and when AIs appear that are entirely trained on public domain and synthetic data, there will be some other moral argument.

[SoftTalker]

Yeah I'm not interested in "art" created by a computer. A watercolor by a first-grader is more interesting.

Same goes for music. If you need AI and autotune, find another way to earn a living.

[brookst]

So you need to know the provenance of art before you can decide if it’s interesting?

[simonw]

Do you think the Lord of the Rings movies were bad art?

[SoftTalker]

Don’t know, didn’t watch them. Tried to read the books back in middle school and just could not get into them.

[NewsaHackO]

Yea, it definitely is just a convenient argument to people that feel threatened. I in no way feel as though the same internet that has so consistently disregarded copyright laws with such reckless abandon is now clutching their pearls about this.

[brookst]

Seriously. What percentage of these pearl-clutchers were mocking the MPAA and Lars Ulrich and supporting Napster as proof that art should be free?

It’s a high percentage. But time, increased personal wealth, and “OMG this might affect me” all have a lot of power.