this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2022
39 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

34904 readers
668 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nutomic@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago (11 children)

This is ridiculous, how would you even determine that a given image was created or edited with AI? And what about images that were generated with Photoshop, do they also require a watermark?

[–] gun@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

If you look into this decision, it's more that China is worried about deepfakes, which is a very real concern.

In recent years, deep synthesis technology has developed rapidly. While serving user needs and improving user experience, it has also been used by some unscrupulous people to produce, copy, publish, and disseminate illegal and harmful information, to slander and belittle others' reputation and honor, and to counterfeit others' identities. Committing fraud, etc., affects the order of communication and social order, damages the legitimate rights and interests of the people, and endangers national security and social stability.

This is likely easy to enforce at the model level, if you have a model that generates lifelike impressions of real people. Enforcing it per image would be impossible I think.

But there are people celebrating this like it's some luddite attempt of China to hold back technological progress for the narrow aim of protecting IP. Any "communist" that is disposed this way, read the quote above a few more times. When the sewing machine was invented, did we hold back the sewing machine so that more tailors could keep their jobs? Why should it be any different for "artists"? Is the solution to alienation turning back society to the dark age? Or is there already a theory of revolutionary change that venerates the acceleration of revolutions in the forces of production? If you hate AI art you are a reactionary.

[–] fdrc_lm@feddit.it 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I don’t hate AI art as long as companies developing it using works publishes by artists do it with the authors’ consent and paying them

[–] jackalope@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Property is a spook. Post scarcity is here. We have to adapt our economic system to the new reality.

Shakespeare didn't invent Romeo and Juliet you know? Back in the day artists didn't have a concept of IP. People would just freely rip off and adapt one another.

[–] gun@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Why? IP is a bankrupt concept. Instead of protecting IP on behalf of artists, we should abolish IP for AI companies. Enforce open sourcing of AI models that use other people's data, nationalize big tech, so on

load more comments (7 replies)