AI reminds me of the old jokes about software designed by programmers for programmers. Scr3w the customer; let's put in what we want!
Among the things I do, I teach Freshman Composition to college students. I DO NOT WANT essays written by ChatGPT. That is a form of plagiarism, which clearly refers (in part) to submitting work that one did not write oneself. If AI wrote it, then technically, no one wrote it, given that AI output is not copyrightable.
I am sick to death of the AI-generated image cr@p that wouldn't know how to render any of this non-art if it weren't trained on the distinctive output of a bajillion real artists, none of whom consented to have their work used as "training material."
And now we have Adobe Systems' revised TOS that states they can and will use any customer work to train their models.
Is it any surprise that people are upset? In part, the collective reaction is a resounding "Did you ask me if I want this cr@p? And given that you didn't, how are you going to react to my desire to make this stop?" And who gave you the right to think this grand-scale appropriation is OK?
I don't want glue in pizza sauce. I don't want to use rocks as nutritional supplements. I don't want law briefs full of fictional case law or 6-fingered photos or any of the rest of this talentless slime.
And as to self checkouts—I can get through the checkout lane faster, ensure that items are bagged for optimal efficiency when I get home, and I don't have to deal with a cashier who licks their fingers to open the bags and expects me to make small talk while they try to hustle me through a slow line. Why not focus on my actual convenience for a hot second?
My money is on diminishing returns, re: generative AI. I'm also betting the appeal of the AI aesthetic trends out sooner than later. It's hard for me to imagine something so un-precise being used generatively by commercial enterprises.
AI reminds me of the old jokes about software designed by programmers for programmers. Scr3w the customer; let's put in what we want!
Among the things I do, I teach Freshman Composition to college students. I DO NOT WANT essays written by ChatGPT. That is a form of plagiarism, which clearly refers (in part) to submitting work that one did not write oneself. If AI wrote it, then technically, no one wrote it, given that AI output is not copyrightable.
I am sick to death of the AI-generated image cr@p that wouldn't know how to render any of this non-art if it weren't trained on the distinctive output of a bajillion real artists, none of whom consented to have their work used as "training material."
And now we have Adobe Systems' revised TOS that states they can and will use any customer work to train their models.
Is it any surprise that people are upset? In part, the collective reaction is a resounding "Did you ask me if I want this cr@p? And given that you didn't, how are you going to react to my desire to make this stop?" And who gave you the right to think this grand-scale appropriation is OK?
I don't want glue in pizza sauce. I don't want to use rocks as nutritional supplements. I don't want law briefs full of fictional case law or 6-fingered photos or any of the rest of this talentless slime.
And as to self checkouts—I can get through the checkout lane faster, ensure that items are bagged for optimal efficiency when I get home, and I don't have to deal with a cashier who licks their fingers to open the bags and expects me to make small talk while they try to hustle me through a slow line. Why not focus on my actual convenience for a hot second?
My money is on diminishing returns, re: generative AI. I'm also betting the appeal of the AI aesthetic trends out sooner than later. It's hard for me to imagine something so un-precise being used generatively by commercial enterprises.