Quote from: Brasilnut on September 27, 2023, 16:09

. double post sorry

you really tripled yourself!

a strange coincidence finding you here now,because just a little while ago,talking about drones,your blog from April 2022 "drone special edition" came to my mind!

I am quite sure that it will be like this,it is still early but in the near future,all AI contents will be labeled in a more appropriate way by law,it is inevitable for various reasons,and is another reason for not give up now,real contents will be always necessary.

Haha was silly of me, I was trying to edit the post but instead I quoted myself! Shouldn't post when tired.

The regulations will be fascinating and I'm going to be watching closely. I asked Chat GPT to imagine the scenario of an important landmark case in 2030 about the use of AI in journalistic images:



"In 2030, the legal landscape surrounding the use of artificial intelligence in journalism has evolved significantly. With the increasing prevalence of AI-generated content, particularly images, a landmark case has emerged that addresses the boundaries of AI involvement in journalism.

Case Overview:
The case revolves around a prominent news organization that routinely uses AI to generate images for its news articles. These AI-generated images are designed to accompany stories, enhance visual appeal, and save time in the newsroom. However, it has come under scrutiny as it has been revealed that a significant proportion of the images used are created by AI algorithms. The plaintiff in the case argues that this level of AI-generated content dilutes the authenticity of journalism and threatens the jobs of human journalists and photographers.

Legal Proceedings:
As the case proceeds, the legal system faces the challenging task of defining the limits of AI involvement in journalism. The judge presiding over the case carefully considers arguments from both sides and reviews existing laws and regulations related to journalistic ethics and content authenticity.

The Ruling:
In a groundbreaking decision, the judge rules that while AI can play a role in journalism, there must be limits to its involvement. The maximum allowable percentage of AI-generated content in journalistic articles is set at 1%. This ruling aims to strike a balance between harnessing AI's efficiency and creativity while preserving the authenticity and human touch in journalism.

Implications:

Journalistic Standards: News organizations are now required to adhere to the 1% AI content limit, promoting a higher degree of journalistic integrity and authenticity. This ruling encourages a recommitment to human journalism and storytelling.

Creative Collaboration: Journalists and AI developers are encouraged to work collaboratively to enhance the quality of news reporting. AI can still assist in various aspects of journalism, such as data analysis, but with a clear boundary on content creation.

Job Security: Human journalists and photographers find reassurance in the ruling, knowing that their jobs are protected to a certain extent. The fear of widespread automation and job displacement is somewhat alleviated.

AI Development: AI developers are motivated to focus on refining AI algorithms to ensure the highest quality and ethical standards within the 1% limit. This encourages innovation in responsible AI development.

In conclusion, the 2030 case regarding AI-generated images in journalism sets a significant precedent by establishing a clear maximum limit for AI involvement in news content. It reflects a balance between harnessing AI's capabilities and safeguarding journalistic authenticity, ethics, and the job security of human professionals. This ruling shapes the future of journalism in an era increasingly influenced by artificial intelligence."

@ Alex interesting and a very likely scenario,otherwise we will be inundated with fake news more than we already are,it would be unacceptable.

@ Noedelhap that's exactly how it is,if you want to continue creating backgrounds and textures,that time is certainly over,you have to adapt and there is still a lot to do and will always be there in the microstock,AIs are certainly not the end.

In my opinion not only will the unique and best artists survive, but those who simply want to adapt to create content that has a utility that cannot be replaced by an AI.

Anybody have any news on iStock / Getty's payment for AI usage / training?

Just published this blog post to highlight the delay and perhaps put some pressure on them to act.

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2024/11/05/wheres-the-pay-istock-gettys-ai-compensation-pledge-still-unfulfilled/

I haven't found anything about a dataset earning on any of the iStock/Getty statements - I just went back through the last 12 statements and there's nothing so far. (approx. 20,000 images and 4,000 videos online)

Thanks for keeping the memory alive - by the way, just a few minutes ago the 3rd dataset earning from Pond5 alone in 2024 came in.

They've said in the iStock forum that the payment will be late December, so I don't think there's any point in applying pressure to them to pay up now.

They've said in the iStock forum that the payment will be late December, so I don't think there's any point in applying pressure to them to pay up now.

That's good to know, thanks for the info! (I don't actively follow the iStock forum)

I have 4k files on istock. Let us see what getty pays out.

Adobe and pond5 have set quite a high bar, especially for videos.

AFAIK nothing has changed about Getty's AI payment schedule. They said it would be late December, they have reiterated in their forum that it will be late December. But I guess that doesn't provide anything dramatic for a blog post.

Slow news day