Skull for memory, No reference. Continuing the diplomacy or discourse of AI, well, On here atleast.
Have you watched Alex Avile and the backlash to the backlash to the backlash? Welp, you are in it right now, I've been trying to build bridges. I'd recommend you watch this before you become here.
I must commend Alex for not taking his video down, this odd collusion of hollywood conservatives that are hijacking and destroying movements needs to be noted.
(Cw, human rights rambling from a tired couch. Including a bit of a socialist analyst) Aaah, The defeatist, misrablist dead end of copyright, if Harlen can call them the 7th circle of hell with publishers, maybe I can place a spicy opinion here.
Silence is capital, another monopoly, when everybody is trying to build trust on the internet, the editorial confessions roll out. Along with the drab examination of the liberal centrists who'd happen to defend the private proporty relations from consolidating commidy value, oh, such a thing that you could state
Journalists don't owe the entertainment media pr any slack. Alex Avile self-publishing that Nickles group disclosure. With such is the diplomatic to the copyright maximalists that he got crudded on. It's always a game, troll bait, and a hornets nest that does not have. He did not sign a non-disclosure deal unlike those of the copyright alliance did so he did a community service.
There's something awfully centrist with publishers wanting to consolidate the means of distribution then raise the commodity value of art, really? Is that the culture industry, I do commodity fetishism
From Deepdreamnights, a public domain artists.
"
The anti-AI side isn't actually anti-AI, they're pro-regulatory-capture-of-AI-by-Megacorporations. The copyright anti-AI argument conveniently leaves it open for Disney, Warner Bros, Nintendo, Sony, the RIAA, all to make their own AI systems to lower their production costs, because they own more than enough material to make powerful datasets.
They get it, you don't, worst of all possible worlds."
![]()
imsobadatnicknames2It was actually a very thematically important foreshadowing arc setting up the Online Artist Community™'s tragic descent into the very thing they sought to destroy (people who want to expand the digital mechanisms to enforce the concept of ownership of .jpgs)
So yes, in light of this new info, I'll be keeping a meter at the CYA copyright enforcement that will only entail a unsafer internet. It's there to empower publishers, not the artists.
xormetric @tentacle.expert· 08/01/2024SMALL ARTISTS ARE NOT PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT copyright is a monopoly. to make a living, artists sell that monopoly to publishers. Thereby losing the right to their own art. Copyright is enforced in court. Taking someone to court costs money. Who, of the small artist and the corporation, has money?"
There are plenty of rights more important than copyright, freedom of expression is one of them, including the freedom to assembly and to protest. Yet it's alarming, so I'll keep a head low her and be sure to differentiate the western artists from the lower working classes.
It's why I've not been posting much, there are absurd paranoia brewing, and it's getting bleak, so sense of discussion as there no's certainty on this issue. Odd activities like Style phrenology along with echo chambers, doing research on this topic like it matters, people need to know the community service of Couch Gregor.
Yet this dirt-digging and wild speculation of ad-hominins only means that they're creating a spectre of free like Nintendo does with its own copyright, only that will understand that this time it's left everybody on the statecraft map in disarray.
I'll leave out with another quote retweet. It's a understatment that this DRM enforcement is going to accidentally be the most second order pro-ai, the bad pro-ai move that's going be, a worser regime overall.
So freedom of expression > copyright, the publishing script puts too much in the hands of publishers and record labels.
@valkyrie.hacker.gfFollow
we're literally going to get mandatory DRM brain implants at this rate
B-Bonus retweet.
Erica "digifox" Kovac
I feel weird being in the "middle" on the AI Argument. The hype machine is out of control, but the anti-AI crowd is almost as crazy with the only redeeming quality being that they have very little control over anything.
I think that generative AI is anywhere from "a cute toy" to "mildly useful in limited contexts" and that Big Tech companies did nothing wrong in training genAI models the way they did because a stricter reading of fair use would risk disallowing many types of transformative work.
I think that the way it's being deployed by the hype-mongers is frequently irresponsible and sometimes deliberately attempting to provoke backlash. I think the long-term destabilizing impacts are minor compared to the overreaction dynamics at play currently.
Like the video model demo from OpenAI recently where they generated a fake closed circuit video of Sam Altman stealing GPUs from BestBuy or w/e seems like it must've been calculated to spook people.
(My response to the hype mongers is well, sex sells, for better or worse.)
Ted Underwood @tedunderwood.com· 55mBased on social media, you might think the US was in the middle of a Butlerian Jihad. But IRL neither party has shown much appetite for regulating AI; universities aren't trying to ban it; content industries are adapting to it. The venting is anti-correlated with change.
This is why no one is writing 10k words a week to counter Zitron's ~10k words about the uselessness of models, inevitability of collapse, &c. You don't need to write 10k words every week arguing that the moon should continue to orbit the earth. People who like the moon's orbit can chill.
I look at Alex Avile for speaking the truth, yet the Tailism of other entertainers along with the inanity of media monopolists. Those who consolidate the distribution. Means That one should always caution with publishers being friendly, there is already an agonise going on.
