The environmental impact argument doesn’t really work anymore now that you can produce AI generated images on a standard gaming PC. Also I’m not sure what you mean by “personal impact”. I can understand “social impact” but if the person generated the image themselves, I assume they would enjoy it and not have a negative personal impact from it.
The training for the models still requires massive data centers, ai has caused data center power usage to double in the last five years, and wasting power on stealing art is still wasting power even if you reduce it down to just running a local model on your gaming pc, which is a tiny fraction of users.
The personal impact is the artist that does not want their art used this way. In this case the artist has made it incredibly clear that ai is a cancer on society and an affront to human life. I think that would affect a normal person that has any shame or empathy.
You can train the models locally now too. Have been able to for awhile actually, don’t even need the latest graphics card, a 3090 or older high server GB cards would work.
The training for the models still requires massive data centers, ai has caused data center power usage to double in the last five years
That’s a good argument for stopping the training of AI models, but the models we have are here to stay.
The personal impact is the artist that does not want their art used this way.
Maybe they shouldn’t have publicly released their art to the world if they didn’t want people or machines to make things similar to it. Copying is not theft, I think Nina Paley is right about that.
From the environmental impact, to the social impact to the personal impact absolutely no part of it is harmless.
I’m a killer, hes a killer, shes a killer, bitch! We all just walking zombies trying to scratch that itch!
The environmental impact argument doesn’t really work anymore now that you can produce AI generated images on a standard gaming PC. Also I’m not sure what you mean by “personal impact”. I can understand “social impact” but if the person generated the image themselves, I assume they would enjoy it and not have a negative personal impact from it.
The training for the models still requires massive data centers, ai has caused data center power usage to double in the last five years, and wasting power on stealing art is still wasting power even if you reduce it down to just running a local model on your gaming pc, which is a tiny fraction of users.
The personal impact is the artist that does not want their art used this way. In this case the artist has made it incredibly clear that ai is a cancer on society and an affront to human life. I think that would affect a normal person that has any shame or empathy.
You can train the models locally now too. Have been able to for awhile actually, don’t even need the latest graphics card, a 3090 or older high server GB cards would work.
That’s a good argument for stopping the training of AI models, but the models we have are here to stay.
Maybe they shouldn’t have publicly released their art to the world if they didn’t want people or machines to make things similar to it. Copying is not theft, I think Nina Paley is right about that.
“Personal impact” yeah bro me turning a picture of my cat into an anime style is literally ruining someone’s life.
Stop being so dramatic.
Stealing another artists work when they have very loudly and publicly stated they do not support you stealing their work does have a personal impact.
You just don’t see artists as people.
Being comically over-dramatic just kind of reinforces my point.