The worm in his brain is just trying to reproduce 🤷

That’s why he brought his children.

She accuses it of admitting students who are contemptuous of America,

OK. So what?

Let’s logic out that statement:

• Educational institution accepts students that are “contemptuous of America” -> When the student graduates are they still “contemptuous”? Did they become moreso? No change? Less? None at all?
• Educational institution actively seeks to deny students who are “contemptuous of America” -> Did they produce “contempt for America” in their graduates? Same problem.

I wonder what would produce “contempt for America”? Maybe deporting people without due process? Or not recognizing human rights?

Maybe we should agree, then: Harvard shouldn’t accept students that hate the Bill of Rights. Reject conservative ideology that suggests that due process shouldn’t be followed. Reject conservative ideology that actively seeks to undermine the US Constitution.

Let’s get keep those people (conservatives) with “contempt for America” away from places like Harvard 👍

I dunno. A dinosaur that’s impossible to disarm sounds badass.

“I don’t know. I’m not, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know,” Trump said, adding that such a requirement would mean “we’d have to have a million or two million or three million trials”.

Yes! Fucking exactly. That’s right. That’s why everyone since forever has been saying that illegal immigration is an untenable problem!

Except this guy… Who doesn’t believe in civil rights or due process.

bows in solemn gesture

Are there any other websites that still let you put in your AIM and ICQ numbers? Or brag about your super low user ID? 19437 BTW 🤣

They will do this but then what option will they have left when they make it even more bloated and slow—since they now have this “extra room”, as it were?

Once the non-loyal judges are imprisoned, everyone else who isn’t white and Republican will also be on the chopping block.

THOSE SWINE!

Sorry, Catholics and Indians… It’s better for America if the curse of JD Vance stays outside the country.

Surely, you have some enemies other than us, yes? Send him there.

Catholics: Please do feel free to send him straight to hell 👍

To be fair, the “vandals” were just doing the Republicans a favor by taping the correct symbol to their door.

Straight up: It wasn’t actually vandalism. Like handing out Russian flags at a conservative event:

https://www.vox.com/2017/2/24/14725950/russian-flag-cpac

If you hired someone to copy Ghibli’s style, then fed that into an AI as training data, it would completely negate your entire argument.

It is not illegal for an artist to copy someone else’s style. They can’t copy another artist’s work—that’s a derivative—but copying their style is perfectly legal. You can’t copyright a style.

All of that is irrelevant, however. The argument is that—somehow—training an AI with anything is somehow a violation of copyright. It is not. It is absolutely 100% not a violation of copyright to do that!

Copyright is all about distribution rights. Anyone can download whatever TF they want and they’re not violating anyone’s copyright. It’s the entity that sent the person the copyright that violated the law. Therefore, Meta, OpenAI, et al can host enormous libraries of copyrighted data in their data centers and use that to train their AI. It’s not illegal at all.

When some AI model produces a work that’s so similar to an original work that anyone would recognize it, “yeah, that’s from Spirited Away” then yes: They violated Ghibli’s copyright.

If the model produces an image of some random person in the style of Studio Ghibli that is not violating anyone’s copyright. It is not illegal nor is it immoral. No one is deprived of anything in such a transaction.

I think your understanding of generative AI is incorrect. It’s not just “logic and RNG”…

If it runs on a computer, it’s literally “just logic and RNG”. It’s all transistors, memory, and an RNG.

The data used to train an AI model is copyrighted. It’s impossible for something to exist without copyright (in the past 100 years). Even public domain works had copyright at some point.

if any of the training data is copyrighted, then attribution must be given, or at the very least permission to use this data must be given by the current copyright holder.

This is not correct. Every artist ever has been trained with copyrighted works, yet they don’t have to recite every single picture they’ve seen or book they’ve ever read whenever they produce something.

I’m still not getting it. What does generative AI have to do with attribution? Like, at all.

I can train a model on a billion pictures from open, free sources that were specifically donated for that purpose and it’ll be able to generate realistic pictures of those things with infinite variation. Every time it generates an image it’s just using logic and RNG to come up with options.

Do we attribute the images to the RNG god or something? It doesn’t make sense that attribution come into play here.

On the contrary, AI enables voice actors to change their voice in ways that biology won’t let them. If a voice actor can act, AI will give them the power to play more parts than they would have been able to previously.

It’s just a tool. It’s not the magic, “replace humans” thing people think it is.

Here I was, thinking that the first AI-generated anime was Ave Mujica. Because it’s that bad.

• The script sounds like it was written by AI.
• The animation in half the scenes is like 12 FPS (because they couldn’t be bothered to wait for a full render).
• The characters lips move like goldfish eating flakes whenever they speak/sing.
• They appear to have used stock mocap for the characters playing instruments and couldn’t be bothered to match up their movements to the music.

By all accounts, it’s like AI did 90% of the work and then they handed it off to some intern for finishing.

If you wanted stability you shouldn’t have backed Trump!

Did they learn nothing from his last term in office? Actually, we know the answer to that (no, they did not).

Now I’m beginning to wonder if big, evil corp executives are just as gullible as the rest of the MAGA crowd that regularly vote against their own interests 🤔

They created golems powered by compressed air instead of magic.

Definitely marking this down in my mental, “in case of Isekai” notes.

The correct response is to do as he asks… Respectfully remove the painting.

Then replace it with a picture of an orange baby and put his name on the plaque.

If you studied loads of classic art then started making your own would that be a derivative work? Because that’s how AI works.

The presence of watermarks in output images is just a side effect of the prompt and its similarity to training data. If you ask for a picture of an Olympic swimmer wearing a purple bathing suit and it turns out that only a hundred or so images in the training match that sort of image–and most of them included a watermark–you can end up with a kinda-sorta similar watermark in the output.

It is absolutely 100% evidence that they used watermarked images in their training. Is that a problem, though? I wouldn’t think so since they’re not distributing those exact images. Just images that are “kinda sorta” similar.

If you try to get an AI to output an image that matches someone else’s image nearly exactly… is that the fault of the AI or the end user, specifically asking for something that would violate another’s copyright (with a derivative work)?