AI Art Panic
> but the act of training a neural network on datasets like this has already been decided to be legal<p>?<p>Has it?<p>Look, you can argue about whether it’s morally right or not to use models that are fine tuned explicitly to copy the style of someone else, trained on their art without their consent, to make a model that can generate images very similar to the training images.<p>You can argue about <i>technically</i> of that’s copying, or if lossy compression is copying.<p>…but <i>legal</i> and <i>moral</i> are different things, and right now, as far as I’m aware:<p>- it’s only legal because there are no laws specifically making it illegal currently.<p>- there are active (eg. Copilot) cases challenging this to set a precedent.<p>- it’s sufficiently ambiguous having a model that anyone can type “a naked picture of a 12 year old” in and get <i>exactly that</i> as output, that stability has nerfed the most recent mode release they’ve done.<p>- there is a reasonably obvious similarity to other fields where a thing is itself not illegal or bad, but it can enable people to do illegal or bad things, and therefore access, ownership and usage of said things (eg. Hand guns) is heavily legislated.<p>I think “this has already been decided to be legal” is a blatantly false assumption.