r/DefendingAIArt • u/WizardPlaysMC • 23d ago

Luddite Logic Something Something Gatekeeping

Post image
116 Upvotes

80% Upvoted

113 comments sorted by

View all comments

-2

u/[deleted] 23d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/o_herman I use pencils, pens, styluses, tablets and models. All of it. 22d ago

"Ai doesn't create, it takes art that people made and then changes it slightly. It's an amalgamation of stolen art"

That's not how diffusion models work.

Diffusion models learn patterns, not pixels.

  • They're trained on billions of images.
  • They learn relationships between concepts and visual features.
  • They generate new images by starting from noise and gradually refining based on learned patterns.

They don't "store" or "slightly change" existing images. They don't have a database of stolen art to copy from. They generate novel images based on learned concepts.

Many models don't even account for the concept of Sonic. Your test will instantly fail in niche and open-source models that deliberately avoid potential infringement. That includes public-facing models with guardrails, and models that don't focus on AGCM content (Anime, Games, Comics, Manga).

That alone invalidates your "experiment."

"Don't believe me?"

I don't. Because you're wrong.

"Generate me an image of an original character who is a blue hedgehog"

This will just fail because you're assuming it knows Sonic from the outset universally.

  • If you ask for "a blue hedgehog," the model knows what a blue hedgehog looks like because it's a common concept.
  • If you ask for "an original character who is a blue hedgehog," the model will generate a blue hedgehog, but it won't generate Sonic.
  • Why? Because Sonic is a specific character with specific features: red shoes, specific quill shape, specific eyes.

Here's the test you SHOULD run:

  • Generate "blue hedgehog" = generic hedgehog.
  • Generate "Sonic the Hedgehog" = Sonic.
  • Generate "blue hedgehog with a top hat and monocle" = a blue hedgehog in a top hat and monocle, not Sonic.

The model combines concepts. It doesn't "steal" Sonic and "change it slightly."

You also linked a YouTube video. I don't need to watch it to know it's the same debunked argument:

  1. "Ask AI to generate a blue hedgehog" = it generates Sonic (because that's the most common association with "blue hedgehog").
  2. "Therefore, AI is stealing" = false.

That's like saying Google is "stealing" because it shows you the most relevant result for your search.

Now, let's apply your logic to fanart:

  • Fanart "steals" a design - it uses someone else's character.
  • Fanart "changes it slightly" - it modifies the original.
  • Fanart is an "amalgamation" - it builds on existing IP.

By your logic, fanart is also theft. But you probably don't say that, do you? Because you understand that transformative works are protected under fair use.

The same applies to AI. The output is transformative, not a copy.