Generative AI is definitely taking everybody�s work and stealing it, but I truly wonder if the same isn�t true of humans.

We all stand on the back of our forebearers. I occasionally write songs, and I can absolutely tell that I�ve borrowed elements from my favorite artist when I look at he song later. It�s not even intentional, but certain turns of phrase and musical leitmotifs are just deep in my brain and pop out occasionally.

I don�t like AI, and I agree with the principles of this lawsuit, but I have asked myself if I have the wrong opinion. I�m just not sure. I suppose part of the difference is AIs are run by faceless corporations. If another person saw my style of something and adapted it into their own, I don�t know if it would bother me. But the same is not true when it comes to business.

Unfortunately, AI is not intelligent, it doesn't think at all. It is a large dataset that is used to create images from past experience. Humans have the ability to create something new, we can think, adapt and we are aware and this allows us to expand on what has been done before but to come up with something truly original setting off new trends and fashions. Look at the world of fashion. There maybe influences, yes, but the styles are taken in new directions. AI can't do this at the moment because you'd need to ask it to create something that isn't in the dataset.

Because AI can't do this the creative imagery industry is in danger of being stuck in one point in time. If large numbers of people stop creating work because it's no longer viable. Youngsters stop training to become artists, photographers or designers because AI has turned it into a very low income job then the source material for AI will dry up and will become stale. By that point it could be too late. It needs to be better regulated and human creativity (all forms) need better protection.

I truly feel for the younger generations who are not long out of university after studying design, illustration and advertising etc if this is not managed correctly. But, at least a small number of CEO's will be making �m's off the back of all artists. AI, in it's current form is all about a small number of people making the money that millions of people before used to make and talking it for themselves. They will employ very few in comparison.

Anyone experiencing delay in receiving payments from adobe stock???

Usually I get it within 6-7 days after requesting payout.
But this time Even after 2 weeks I don't received my payment, still it showing "Pending".

I create motion graphics.

Images are not used directly in making the new product from training. Getty will lose the case against Stability AI.

The question is, could the AI model exist without our images that they took without permission. The model was made using our creative imagery and without that imagery, they wouldn't have a model that could create new imagery.

Basically, they stole the imagery and are asking for forgiveness rather than asking for permission. Bang out of line and I believe that is the direction they will take in the courts. If they can recreate the model from scratch without the use of the imagery they stole, then all credit to them.

Just thinking, which at my age doesn't happen often, why not Facebook?  Here is a fishing site (see below link) I belong to that includes side chats. One administrator and some moderators to run the free site that Facebook updates to make sure it runs on today's platforms.

Sample site
https://www.facebook.com/groups/558388600928763/

I reject Facebooks terms and conditions, privacy policy and business practices in perpetuity.  X is worse.  I just say NO to both.