zlacker

> We mash together ideas, and try to distance it from other works. It doesn't matter what we take as inspiration, or so we claim, as long as the output doesn't overlap too much with pre-existing work.

I feel a big part what makes it okay or not okay here is intention and capability. Early in an artistic journey things can be highly derivative but that's due to the student's capabilities. A beginner may not intend to be derivative but can't do better.

I see pages of applications of ML out there being derivative on purpose (Edit: seemingly trying to 'outperform' given freelance artists with glee, in their own styles).

>>wnkrsh+(OP)
But the ML itself doesn't have intention. The author of the ML does, and that i would think is no different than an artist that purposefully makes copied/derived work.

TBH given how derivative humans tend to be, with such a deeper "Human Learning" model and years and years of experiences.. i'm kinda shocked ML is even capable of even appearing non-derivative. Throw a child in a room, starve it of any interaction and somehow (lol) only feed it select images and then ask it to draw something.. i'd expect it to perform similarly. A contrived example, but i'm illustrating the depth of our experiences when compared to ML.

I half expect that the "next generation" of ML is fed by a larger dataset by many orders of magnitude more similarly matching our own. A video feed of years worth of data, simulating the complex inputs that Human Learning gets to benefit from. If/when that day comes i can't imagine we will seem that much more unique than ML.

I should be clear though; i am in no way defending how companies are using these products. I just don't agree that we're so unique in how we think, how we create, and if we're truly unique in any way shape or fashion. (Code, Input) => Output is all i think we are, i guess.

>>unshav+Qv
Of course it's the intention of the user that matters here, I just see that these models give easy access to make extremely derivative works from existing artist's work - and I feel that's an unethical use of the unethically sourced models.

Anyone finding their own artistic voice with the tools, I respect that, those people are artists - but training with the aim to create derivative models, that should be called out.