Every human artist learns their craft from other artists and sources, and uses various references in creating their artwork. The AI just does that on a far larger scale, with greater memory retention.
Having watched the Zapata video, these are my thoughts:
1. Given existing legal precedents in USA, I believe the law is in favour of AI art generators.
Even if the courts were to ban AI from using copyrighted images, there would still be massive tomes of non-copyrighted images for the AI to learn from. Furthermore, these AI companies are technological giants - and, if profitable, can employ artists to create new artwork to be fed into their machine.
2. If one were to toy around with the various AI tools we have today (e.g. AI image generators, ChatGPT) - one thing which stands out to me is that AIs do not have values, opinions or judgments. At best, an AI can only reflect - in a limited way - the values and intentions of its creator.
This realization brought relief to me - why? Because much of human endeavour - including art - requires personal values and judgment. Art is *precisely* an expression of an artist's values, opinions and judgment.
3. Many AI image generators utilize the "stable diffusion" algorithm. As it turns out, there are newer implementations which allow you to run the algorithm on a home computer now. This heavily reduces man's reliance on the mega-corporations which own the commercial AI image generators.
So given the reasons I outlined above, I've become an optimist with regard to AI's impact on the art industry. Job losses will be mitigated, and I believe AI could eventually be just another handy tool in the artist's toolbox.
Every human artist learns their craft from other artists and sources, and uses various references in creating their artwork. The AI just does that on a far larger scale, with greater memory retention.
Having watched the Zapata video, these are my thoughts:
1. Given existing legal precedents in USA, I believe the law is in favour of AI art generators.
Even if the courts were to ban AI from using copyrighted images, there would still be massive tomes of non-copyrighted images for the AI to learn from. Furthermore, these AI companies are technological giants - and, if profitable, can employ artists to create new artwork to be fed into their machine.
2. If one were to toy around with the various AI tools we have today (e.g. AI image generators, ChatGPT) - one thing which stands out to me is that AIs do not have values, opinions or judgments. At best, an AI can only reflect - in a limited way - the values and intentions of its creator.
This realization brought relief to me - why? Because much of human endeavour - including art - requires personal values and judgment. Art is *precisely* an expression of an artist's values, opinions and judgment.
3. Many AI image generators utilize the "stable diffusion" algorithm. As it turns out, there are newer implementations which allow you to run the algorithm on a home computer now. This heavily reduces man's reliance on the mega-corporations which own the commercial AI image generators.
So given the reasons I outlined above, I've become an optimist with regard to AI's impact on the art industry. Job losses will be mitigated, and I believe AI could eventually be just another handy tool in the artist's toolbox.