no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
7 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
[–] 25 points 1 month ago

Cannot tell the difference between artwork and a signature, used to pick military targets. This is fine.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I haven't read the article but what's described in the headline is abhorerent. Ironically the technology could be used to identifying times when artists' identities are being misattributed or stolen. Pretty simple for an artist to define their portfolio then have a bot flag anything it finds with their signature on it that they didn't create themselves.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago

    When a technology is made by corrupt people, we shouldn’t be surprised when it doesn’t corrupt things.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    https://lemmy.world/post/51078601/25471615

    I'm pretty sure I can prove MTG trained the Stable diffusion early versions.

    The prompt was "a sorceress"

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    I'm quite glad OpenAI is showing its Elon Musk (or Grok) face. It makes me understand why Elon Musk was an original founder. Thank you for showing your true colors always.

  • source
  • 5 comments in c/hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se view that post
    [–] 24 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    That's called fraud. Are we deciding that crimes committed by AI don't count as crimes?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago

    Crimes committed by humans using AI are crimes. "AI" doesn't do shit without someone giving it instructions & some agency.

    Next - you can look at corporations in the US and elsewhere for legal shields to crime... bad company, here's a small fine and a huge government contract.

    AI isn't the problem, just a distraction for simple minds; meanwhile the future is plundered.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I think it's technically only a civil matter unless the human who sold the tokens or the human who requested the image strongly implied the works were actually made by that artist while selling to a third party.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    So…like AI song generation adding Jason Derulo’s tag in generated music because it scraped his music and mistook him singing his own name for “musical content.”

  • source
  • 4 comments in c/fediverse_vs_disinfo@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post
    [–] 26 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    A cartoonist's signature is effectively their trademark. I wonder if cartoonists might have more success prosecuting LLM companies through trademark law than others have had using copyright law.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Yeah, now it's not just plagiarism or piracy. It's fraud.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago

    You're absolutely right! It's not just plagiarism or piracy—it's blatant fraud and trademark abuse.

    Fortunately for us, we own the government and the media, so it doesn't matter! Let me know if there's anything else you'd like me to clarify! ✨

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    There's someone on Lemmy who posts slop cartoons (to like...politicalmemes2 or something) and I feel like I've seen a smudged "signature"

  • source
  • 3 comments in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 16 points 1 month ago

    This is very well-written. The closing line is stellar.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago

    corporate crime machine

  • source