@cliffjones "no, see, sampling is only a crime if poor, non-white people do it; if it's a megacorp doing the sampling, it's called progress!"
@rysiek @cliffjones I would say it's more like the difference between Weird Al doing a parody of a song (which is more akin to sampling in your metaphor) vs. Weird Al doing a pastiche/style parody of another artist (which is more akin to A.I. art).
@IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones it’s not really comparable to either of those examples, because 1) Weird Al doesn’t require actual copies of the songs he parodies to produce his own music, 2) AI-generated art is not considered parody, which is often granted a fair-use exception to copyright, and 3) Weird Al is not computer software.
@jepyang @rysiek @cliffjones all three of those things are besides the point. My point is one is doing direct lifting (for which Weird Al secured permission, BTW, and doesn't rely on fair use), and the other is style parodies. Should Weird Al get permission if he does a song in the same *style* as another artist? Because AI pictures seem more like style pastiches than direct lifting.
@jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones Even in that case, it's Weird Al who gets the copyright, not... the operator of Weird Al...

@alilly @jepyang @rysiek @cliffjones

I've checked the ASCAP/BMI info, the original songwriters get all the credit and royalties, even in Weird Al's parodies. They get nothing in his style parodies.

@IronCurtain which is nice, but ChatGPT is not generating parodies, for starters because ChatGPT is not an intentional actor here, and has no actual agency.

Also:

> Sta­ble Dif­fu­sion relies on a math­e­mat­i­cal process called dif­fu­sion to store com­pressed copies of these train­ing images, which in turn are recom­bined to derive other images. It is, in short, a 21st-cen­tury col­lage tool.
https://stablediffusionlitigation.com/

@alilly @jepyang @cliffjones

Stable Diffusion litigation · Joseph Saveri Law Firm & Matthew Butterick

Stable Diffusion litigation

Stable Diffusion is amazing, ethical, and a gift to humanity

So first, let me say that stable diffusion has personally allowed me to create some amazing pieces of aren't that I wouldn't have been able to...

reddit

@IronCurtain StableDiffusion and other huge models can only be created and controlled by large players.

The power dynamics of such gigantic models are not democratizing. Quite the contrary.

They siphon in works/art/code done by thousands of small independent creators, disregarding their wishes, and become a tool that can only be wielded fully — and controlled fully — by the Microsofts of this world.

@alilly @jepyang @cliffjones

@rysiek @alilly @jepyang @cliffjones

Midjourney is a Microsoft? Open AI is an Apple?

Your arguments are prima facie ridiculous.

Microsoft reportedly plans to invest $10 billion in creator of buzzy A.I. tool ChatGPT

A bet on ChatGPT could help Microsoft boost its efforts in web search, a market dominated by Google.

CNBC

@rysiek @alilly @jepyang @cliffjones

I mean, if you wanted to make a valid criticism of Open AI, you can say that it was partially co-founded by techbros Elon Musk (the same one destroying the bird site) and Peter Thiel ('nuff said).

Strange that those aren't your arguments.

EDIT: here's proof of that: https://openai.com/blog/introducing-openai/

Introducing OpenAI

OpenAI is a non-profit artificial intelligence research company. Our goal is to advance digital intelligence in the way that is most likely to benefit humanity as a whole, unconstrained by a need to generate financial return. Since our research is free from financial obligations, we can better focus on a

OpenAI

@IronCurtain glad you made them for me, because they are indeed good arguments too. There's plenty of problems here.

Long story short: these models are not going to be a democratizing force in tech, or art, or anywhere really, due to hardware requirements and related economies of scale.

@alilly @jepyang @cliffjones

@IronCurtain they might have been started by small independent teams, but the hardware requirements of these models and economies of scale involved will lead to them either being bought out by huge players, or become huge players themselves.

Microsoft and Apple also started as tiny "garage" companies by a few hobbyists.

@alilly @jepyang @cliffjones

@jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones "Weird Al is not computer software." I'm not sure this is true.
@Bmcraec @jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones I now want a Weird Al song exploring this possibility.
@ocdtrekkie @jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones I'm sure he's up for the challenge, though I cannot imagine which existing song would fit the bill.
@jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones My brain just realized. Weird Al as RoboCop AND The T-827 terminator model. Accordion not included.
@jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones Also, Weird Al *does* seek permission from the original songwriters, and was notably upset one time when he found out someone he thought he had permission from turned out not to have ever been informed (due to producer shenanigans).
@polyplacophora @jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones I believe that was Coolio with Gangsta's Paradise (Al's Amish Paradise). Lady Gaga got upset her manager had declined Al's Perform This Way cover of Born This Way. James Blunt and Atlantic Records declined the commercial release of Al's You're Pitiful cover of You're Beautiful (referenced in the White'n'Nerdy music video and available via Al's website)
@jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones Weird Al, not to be confused with weird A.I.

@axx I was waiting for someone to make that joke. Thank you.  

@jepyang @IronCurtain @cliffjones

@axx @jepyang @IronCurtain @rysiek @cliffjones I was indeed confused, guess i’mma set my fonts to serif again