A federal judge rejected arguments from Stability AI, Midjourney and DeviantArt that the suit is intended to suppress its free speech.

A federal judge rejected arguments from Stability AI, Midjourney and DeviantArt that the suit is intended to suppress its free speech.

  • hoshikarakitaridia@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    232·
    9 months ago

    Fair enough. I am really pro AI but even then this suit is important and the mills of the courts need to start grinding on this suit since about 2y ago. So let’s get this going. Right call.

    • jagungal@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      9 months ago

      Out of curiosity, why do you say you’re really pro AI? I feel like I’m stuck in an anti-AI bubble ATM.

      • darthelmet@lemmy.worldEnglish
        361·
        9 months ago

        For me, I just recognize that AI, or any technology isn’t the problem. It’s context it exists in, who gets to use it, and how.

        We shouldn’t have to choose between automating boring or dangerous jobs and letting people live dignified lives free from the fear of poverty. We shouldn’t have to choose between having AIs that can generate all sorts of interesting media quickly (even if a lot of it isn’t that good yet, it can still serve its purposes, like say, quickly mocking up an idea to see if it’s worth going forward with it.) and ruining the livelihoods of the real artists that made it possible. We also shouldn’t have to deal wit the mountain of garbage that will be created and shoved in our faces by corporations that don’t understand what the limitations of the technology are.

        These are all capitalism problems. We should probably do something about that instead of asking dumb questions like if AI can really make “art” or if it’s copyright infringement.

      • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.mlEnglish
        147·
        9 months ago

        Not parent, but because of the following reasons:

        • Stability AI for images, and many others like Llama for chatbots are open source and can run on commodity hardware
        • AI doesn’t replace skills, it’s only a tool to enhance them: As a coder, I can use Stability AI to make cool art, but my AI generated work isn’t nearly as cool as when an artist uses AI tools
        • You can’t really fight it, so you may as well embrace it
        • Alto@kbin.social
          14·
          9 months ago

          I think the issue with point 2 is that most of the people doing the work know that, but the people making decisions tend to not. We’ve seen time and time again that companies will absolutely ruin their future prospects for short terms profits. This isn’t going to be an exception, and a lot of people that the companies can’t actually afford to lose are going to get laid off.

        • tabular@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          9 months ago

          If an AI tool helps your output by doing something intelligent for you that “enhances” the work but you didn’t do the part the AI did - the AI doing something intelligent was a substitute for you doing something intelligent.

          In the minimal a single skill loss is not significant to you producing output, but in the maximal none of your human skill is needed. AI will think of better prompts than you, or artists, to make cool art.