I feel like it's okay to use AI as a tool to assist you in making art instead of it just making the entire piece. I make music and I: write, record and mix my songs but I don't have the knowledge and skills to master them, so I've used AI to help with that. the video was great btw, the editing and aesthetic of it was really well done :))
@@finnj_ agreed! Its just ashame when corporations take full advantage of AI when artists are available for commission. I appreciate the feedback! And of course thank you for watching :)
I think generative AI is an amazing new piece of technology for inspirational purposes. Sometimes you're stuck on something or maybe need some inspiration. You can now get that with a prompt. Completely letting AI making images is obviously not art.
It is for sure! Yeah I agree, AI art is not real art. If humans make bad or good art it doesn't matter at least it was made by us. Also, stealing the work or 'training' the data from RUclipsrs was insane to me.
Incredible video! Your content was engaging and insightful, with top-notch visuals and clear explanations. Truly impressive and informative! (I used AI to write that comment)
If I study an artist and train on his work to do it myself, should I contact him for permission ? no ? Then why should these AI companies should ask for permissions. Disclaimer : I hate these companies and wish Adobe would burn in a hell. But arguments used by anti AI folks are pretty weak.
AI is stealing in the same way you stole the footage you used in your video. Did you ask permission to use every piece of footage? Did you ask Netflix to use their intro? Did you ask The Hollywood Reporter to use screenshots from their website? Did you ask the WSJ to use their footage, which wasn't theirs to begin with, but OpenAI's? Or did you use it because your work was transformative and largely surpassed the value of each and every element you used? Can ChatGPT show you the contents of an entire book? No, it can't. It doesn't work that way. It just gathers knowledge and creates something new on top of it.
Talk to every single creator on this platform that uses everything you've described in your comment and see what they say. It's all in fair use. It's another way utilize what we have on the internet to drive visual storytelling. Everything that AI creates is visual slop (IMO), its neat to play around with and utilize as a tool. But it doesn't have the character or personality to it. Everything created by anyone comes from something my message was to safeguard those creations without AI capturing that, re-rendering it into something an artist didn't consent it to make. I appreciate your thoughts and critique to my video.
@@kurtispeak Yes, it's fair use. And do you know what determines it being fair use? The law in a certain jurisdiction. That's why there are ongoing lawsuits: some people believe the use of these materials is legitimate, and some disagree. We'll see how it ends. I personally believe it's also fair use since it's transformative and doesn't display the original content as is; it only shows a version based on a certain amount of knowledge. You, a human, can watch a whole movie, but you can't show it to an audience without permission. You can only show snippets of it. And that's precisely what LLMs do: they have access to all the information available and then make something out of it, but they don't display it in its entirety. They go even further than that, and they don't show pretty much anything verbatim. And when you speak of "character" and "personality," those are arbitrary qualities that you personally value. That's why everyone can still choose to consume goods only made by humans, whether it's text, art, bread, clothing, or whatever. But it's not that creativity must be seen differently. You wouldn't be doing what you do if you hadn't seen any videos up to this point. Without a reference, with a camera in your hands, the result would be awful. If it's good, it's because you've learned from watching other videos. Somehow, if a machine does the same thing, it's theft. I don't believe it is.
@@grandasperj No, it can't. What has happened is that chatgpt has shown information that was behind a paywall, but not in whole and not verbatim. However, since it was behind a paywall, the only way it could know that information is if its model was trained on it.
IDK how this video got recommended to me but my impression is that the caption is too clickbaity, I follow @TonyAndChelsea. They have strong opinion about AI. My opinion is that, as long as we have more complicated technology we will need more qualified personnel. The issue here is that the government wants lest educated people as they are easily manipulated.
I am here to yap about ai…let me know your thoughts on the current state of AI 🤖
this video is awesome, and to think that the thumbnail is the only reason i clicked
The thumbnail is the ONLY reason I made the video in the first place
I feel like it's okay to use AI as a tool to assist you in making art instead of it just making the entire piece. I make music and I: write, record and mix my songs but I don't have the knowledge and skills to master them, so I've used AI to help with that.
the video was great btw, the editing and aesthetic of it was really well done :))
@@finnj_ agreed! Its just ashame when corporations take full advantage of AI when artists are available for commission. I appreciate the feedback! And of course thank you for watching :)
"The beauty of art lies in the experience of making it."
Couldn't have said it better myself. 🙌🏽
I think generative AI is an amazing new piece of technology for inspirational purposes. Sometimes you're stuck on something or maybe need some inspiration. You can now get that with a prompt. Completely letting AI making images is obviously not art.
It is for sure! Yeah I agree, AI art is not real art. If humans make bad or good art it doesn't matter at least it was made by us. Also, stealing the work or 'training' the data from RUclipsrs was insane to me.
🔥🔥🔥🔥 keep it up bro!
Incredible video! Your content was engaging and insightful, with top-notch visuals and clear explanations. Truly impressive and informative! (I used AI to write that comment)
@@ayitsallen you are now my arch nemesis 😤 jk thank you!
If I study an artist and train on his work to do it myself, should I contact him for permission ? no ? Then why should these AI companies should ask for permissions. Disclaimer : I hate these companies and wish Adobe would burn in a hell. But arguments used by anti AI folks are pretty weak.
The internet is just everyone else's computer.
AI is stealing in the same way you stole the footage you used in your video. Did you ask permission to use every piece of footage? Did you ask Netflix to use their intro? Did you ask The Hollywood Reporter to use screenshots from their website? Did you ask the WSJ to use their footage, which wasn't theirs to begin with, but OpenAI's? Or did you use it because your work was transformative and largely surpassed the value of each and every element you used? Can ChatGPT show you the contents of an entire book? No, it can't. It doesn't work that way. It just gathers knowledge and creates something new on top of it.
Talk to every single creator on this platform that uses everything you've described in your comment and see what they say. It's all in fair use. It's another way utilize what we have on the internet to drive visual storytelling. Everything that AI creates is visual slop (IMO), its neat to play around with and utilize as a tool. But it doesn't have the character or personality to it. Everything created by anyone comes from something my message was to safeguard those creations without AI capturing that, re-rendering it into something an artist didn't consent it to make. I appreciate your thoughts and critique to my video.
@@kurtispeak Yes, it's fair use. And do you know what determines it being fair use? The law in a certain jurisdiction. That's why there are ongoing lawsuits: some people believe the use of these materials is legitimate, and some disagree. We'll see how it ends. I personally believe it's also fair use since it's transformative and doesn't display the original content as is; it only shows a version based on a certain amount of knowledge. You, a human, can watch a whole movie, but you can't show it to an audience without permission. You can only show snippets of it. And that's precisely what LLMs do: they have access to all the information available and then make something out of it, but they don't display it in its entirety. They go even further than that, and they don't show pretty much anything verbatim. And when you speak of "character" and "personality," those are arbitrary qualities that you personally value. That's why everyone can still choose to consume goods only made by humans, whether it's text, art, bread, clothing, or whatever. But it's not that creativity must be seen differently. You wouldn't be doing what you do if you hadn't seen any videos up to this point. Without a reference, with a camera in your hands, the result would be awful. If it's good, it's because you've learned from watching other videos. Somehow, if a machine does the same thing, it's theft. I don't believe it is.
chatgpt can show you the content of an entire book. there has been a lot of dramas concerning chatgpt leaking paid articles.
@@grandasperj No, it can't. What has happened is that chatgpt has shown information that was behind a paywall, but not in whole and not verbatim. However, since it was behind a paywall, the only way it could know that information is if its model was trained on it.
IDK how this video got recommended to me but my impression is that the caption is too clickbaity,
I follow @TonyAndChelsea. They have strong opinion about AI.
My opinion is that, as long as we have more complicated technology we will need more qualified personnel.
The issue here is that the government wants lest educated people as they are easily manipulated.