Comments by "Kristopher Driver" (@paxdriver) on "Forbes Breaking News" channel.

@jaxkk1119 I study AI and am a published artist, so I believe it is you who ought to do your homework first ;p If you'd philosophize just a little bit you might realize these arguments have arisen before, when photographs replaced portraits and cars replaced stablehands and street cleaners. Looms replaced seamstresses, and machinery replaced many cobblers... But guess who manages textile factories, QA, engineering new equipment and repairing it, vehicle repairs and custom work for enthusiasts. The people displaced gain higher skills in the same field thanks to those new tools, or they change careers. It's not a big deal to have art "stolen" so long as it isn't copied. That's how every human learns to produce art. We reuse words we've heard before to make novel phrases just like AI's reuse styles to produce novel content too. You're completely neglecting the benefits in your patronizing argument: namely that there's no barrier to entry now for stock images to use in other creative works. You're also forgetting that without artists these models will not only stagnate but implode, so the entire AI model relies on continuously supporting new art made by humans so it doesn't feed it's training with its own outputs. There's a discussion to be had if you can be open minded about all sides.
1
If you're arrested, a cop must tell you what for. So if a company is going to commit a crime if done w/o explicit consent, then what's unreasonable about ensuring they first have consent from the consumer?
1