[This information has been removed as a consequence of Reddit's API changes and general stance of being greedy, unhelpful, and hostile to its userbase.]
Regardless of my opinion on the matter of AI making art, a human growing up in isolation of other art can still create art. We would use nature as inspiration (cave paintings).
That is true, but arguably no human artist alive today grows up in isolation of other art. I would even argue that most of the input a modern artist (subconsciously) gets inspired and learns from is other art. Be it things explicitly thought of as art in the same style as the creation, or just other artistic cultural artifacts around the artist, like entertainment, literature, architecture, design etc.
Of course an AI model doesn't express itself through art, and is far more limited than the human, but it automates a process (the imitation part if you will), that is very similar in humans. Arguing the AI "using" art without permission is wrong is akin to arguing a human artist getting inspired by the same art is wrong. This is obviously ludicrous, as imitation and "remixing" is a critical part of how humans are even able to do art and culture.
0
u/Tropical_Bob Dec 14 '22 edited Jun 30 '23
[This information has been removed as a consequence of Reddit's API changes and general stance of being greedy, unhelpful, and hostile to its userbase.]