vorpa-glavo
No bio...
User ID: 674
Sure, for dumb machines, I agree.
But there's a point where the level of credit one might want to claim becomes silly. I like generative AI, and I think AI art has the potential to blossom into an interesting art scene, but I think a person who can barely draw stick figures making certain kinds of ownership/credit claims over AI art output is silly.
Don't get me wrong. I know there are people who already have a deep knowledge of specific LoRAs and the ins and outs of prompting, and who spend hours in-painting and modifying an AI image until it matches their vision. Those people I would consider "true" AI artists and they do actually have a level of knowledge and expertise that they can be proud of.
I just don't think language and general knowledge have caught up with generative AI capabilities. Today, if I paint something, there is no expectation that I went out and collected the pigments by hand, but that might have been the expectation in some times and places. So too, when I point to an image I made with a single prompt, and say "I made that", a lot of people are going to see me being a little big for my britches (even if I internally don't mean anything more than: I prompted it once and it looked good enough, so I posted it.)
- Prev
- Next

I respect the skill of good management. I don't think that a good manager should feel like they have more capabilities than they actually do.
Put it this way: if you were stranded on a desert island with a broken ship motor, would you rather have people with the knowledge and skills to fix the ship motor stranded with you, or their manager?
More options
Context Copy link