We need to get a handle on this before it becomes more difficult to distinguish. Companies have demonstrated they will sneak AI assets into development without a second thought.
The difference is a person is paid to airbrush or Photoshop. AI analyzed an existing piece of artwork someone created, copied it, then spit out a slightly modified version and called it an original creation.
AI analyzed an existing piece of artwork someone created, copied it, then spit out a slightly modified version and called it an original creation.
“AI” did none of those things. As much as you want to personify tools, a human was paid to use LLMs to generate that output. It did not magically create that out of its own free will. These are not people, and they do not act on their own.
We need to get a handle on this before it becomes more difficult to distinguish. Companies have demonstrated they will sneak AI assets into development without a second thought.
How is this any worse than airbrushing models and Photoshopping movie posters?
The difference is a person is paid to airbrush or Photoshop. AI analyzed an existing piece of artwork someone created, copied it, then spit out a slightly modified version and called it an original creation.
“AI” did none of those things. As much as you want to personify tools, a human was paid to use LLMs to generate that output. It did not magically create that out of its own free will. These are not people, and they do not act on their own.
Please don’t try to bring common sense to Lemmy, we like to be in a hateful circlejerk here.
Blame the tool! The unthinking tool! Think of the poor ceos who would have to deal with bad pr if you don’t blame the tools!
Why ask the question then if you already knew the answer?