"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
Artist Jingna Zhang built Cara, a platform explicitly intended to protect artists from having their art stolen by AI...and yet these people just won't leave them well enough alone.
Antagonises people who want to stay away from AI
Cries when people hate AI
Such a cognitive dissonance
There has to be a word for people, who when they hear someone hates X, but they personally like the X, so they decide to do the X even harder out of spite or as a defiance.
Toddlers, Republicans, Mentally Challenged, Idiots... Lots of words take your pick
These are the most deeply insecure people
Gross
Recently I've been embedding metadata into pictures I upload which include the cost to license out the image for AI training: 1 million dollars. Then, if an AI company scrapes my picture, I can take that company to court and have a concrete dollar amount for how much that company owes me for damages.
I think you should also include the text somewhere reachable so no-one can claim that license wasn't obscured. Its totally fair to strike back with your own type of EULA!
Its a bit delusional to think you can sue them. For a number of reasons, not least of which is that you don't have the funds for a protracted legal battle and that the burden of proof that your work was used is pretty much impossible to prove.
I don't think so. First of all, if a lawyer thinks that I have a strong case, they could agree to be paid after I win, so I don't need to pay out of pocket up front. Second, it is easy to prove that an AI company used my pictures, since they would need to download the pictures to train on them. Alternatively, if a platform sells it to the AI company, there is a record that it was sold for the purposes of AI training.(In that case, we don't have to prove that the image was used for training, since the crime is the sale.) Lastly, since the license and purchase info is contained within the metadata of the picture, they can't argue that the license was unavailable or something. They have it right there in their servers!
I'm not a lawyer, but as an artist, bravo. You've changed how I look at this. No sarcasm here. 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
How will you poof that there was this high of a damage?
Its art, the artist is saying if you want it you have to pay x amount and they are taking it so the presumption is that they both know the value put on it by the artist and decided to use it.
It's not for damage, it's the cost to use the art. If they don't want to pay for it then they're free to simply not use it.
I understand that, but you can not simply put random price tags on things and expect that to work in a legal case. Otherwise any pirating of one movie would result in bankruptcy of the person, as the company could just claim 100 fantastillion in damage for one download.
Anyone know the ways one might remove Glaze and Nightshade? It’d be good to figure out how to make them permanent or show that it’s been tampered with, maybe?
I hope shitty things like this motivate people to organize into alternative networks, like local meshnets and more in-person community interactions. The internet may be hopelessly broken at this point.
I'll plug meshtastic and ham radio, then. Meshtastic (at least in the US, no idea about other places) is legal to do without any sort of license. It's a peer to peer messaging service basically. So imagine like a walkie talkie that sends texts. Ham Radio needs a license but blows the doors open on the types of stuff you can do.
"defending AI art".... jesus, that's sad.
Imagine having so little talent that you consider AI generated slop "art"
Edit*
It's amazing how disrespectful these idiots can be. They'll destroy and steal people's work, feed it to Big Corpo™ Slopinator 4.7, get shit-tier content in return, just because they chugged the kool-aid that this tech with billions of dubious investments is the future of everything.
And all because they didnt get into art school.
Who would have thought not getting into art school would be such a major cause of issues for humanity.
Actually. I have a hot take.
Forgive me... But the solution is not to replicate Instagram. Which is what Cara does.
Nor DeviantArt, either.
That's never going to work, for precisely the above reason, and many others.
This is something that's bothered me immensely about photography (which I'm getting back into as a hobby). Because, for all the "taking a stand" the community does, what do they do en masse?
Subscribe to Adobe
Live on Instagram
Worship corporate influencers.
Upload stuff to clouds that the privacy policy says will be used to train.
Just to start.
It infuriates me.
I'm all for the anti-slop stands, but the bulk of the community has precisely zero leg to stand on, if they're just going to fork over cash hand-and-fist to feed the beasts, and spend all their time on those platforms.
So what do we do?
Make prints. Display them! It can be in museums, festivals, meet ups, in your place, on the street, literally anywhere you want. Even if its on digital screens; as long as its in person, and the digital copy is squirreled away.
And that's if you feel strongly about the training thing. Personally, I'm more inclined to just post stuff under a permissive license places like Wikipedia could use (albeit not on Instagram).
To be clear, I don't mean to lump everyone into that. There's tons of photographers outside that bubble.
...But there are a ton in it, and they happen to be the loudest complainers.
The mass amount of morons wearing pervert glasses will probably just end up copying those prints
Yeah good luck asshole.
PSA to anyone who uploads art online, anywhere. Poison it first. Use the latest version. I'm sorry but you are in an arms race now. Dickhead over here is full of shit, but even if they're not, Nightshade is updated fast.
Cara uses third-party content moderation services from Hive (an AI company) to prevent AI-generated art from being uploaded onto the site.
Hahahahaha so this friendly™ Chinese platform basically feeds every uploaded image into an AI to determine if it's AI.
Just self host your own personal blog/art or use a proper website and not that shitshow.
You can tell just by their tone that they know what they're doing is immoral and wrong, but they still do it. Hard to not become a misanthrope living in this society.
This asshole is testing some deep waters when it comes to contributory liability of copyright infringement in the US: https://www.cooley.com/news/insight/2026/2026-03-26-supreme-court-confirms-limits-on-contributory-liability-for-copyright-infringement
An app like Cara, that positions itself as an Anti-AI art platform, would obviously be targeted by anyone who's offended simply by its existence.
Not only its a honey-pot of art, it's also a challenge for any self proclaimed ai "prompt kiddie" to hurt the other side.
They need to apply better protections to at least make mass scraping by bots a bit more difficult and expensive.
Going out of their way to disseminate creators' art in the specific way they have asked not to, then to go and gloat about it is peak disrespectful jerk behaviour, and seems commonplace among the pro-AI crowd.
To give an analogy, if someone cooked a noodle dish, shared it with the public and asked people to use a fork or chopsticks, it would be one thing for you to take some home and eat it with your hands on your own. Weird but whatever. But to go and post online about them eating with their hands or another way, mocking the wishes of the creator for any reason other than disability accommodation, that's not illegal but it is hella disrespectful and hurtful.