Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Mastodon.art just banned AI art [View all]
Post about it from the person in charge there: https://masto.ai/@[email protected]/109785175102774337
Blog post about the rule change: https://dotart.blog/dotart-blog/ai-art-rule-change
-snip-
Behind the scenes I've been rejecting applications from people who specify they want an account to post AI art, I never boost or interact with any AI art from Curator, and tend to mute off-instance accounts I see posting AI art using the art hashtags I follow just to keep them out of my search results. But just for us to have a more definitive stance on it, we're updating our rules to be more strict on what we're allowing going forward.
The main point of contention with AI art is that the publicly accessible models people use to generate images were trained using other people's artwork without their consent. It's a glaring issue in ethics, and obviously one that's close to home for an instance full of artists who've had their work scraped by crawlers that pass on the data to things like Stable Diffusion for training.
As such, from this point forward, no AI art is allowed on .art. If you want to post AI art, there are plenty of other instances that don't regulate posting it, and you can create an account on one of those.
We're aware that there are some grey areas, like people who generate and then heavily modify AI art to use in work that's otherwise their own and where those lines of ownership might begin/end, or people training AI on their own art but given how prominent the ethics issue is with the training models right now, and the lack of transparency from a lot of models on where they got their training data, we're keeping the rules tight and all-encompassing. If, in future, some models emerge that are verifiably trained ethically without infringement on existing works, we will re-visit the rule.
Behind the scenes I've been rejecting applications from people who specify they want an account to post AI art, I never boost or interact with any AI art from Curator, and tend to mute off-instance accounts I see posting AI art using the art hashtags I follow just to keep them out of my search results. But just for us to have a more definitive stance on it, we're updating our rules to be more strict on what we're allowing going forward.
The main point of contention with AI art is that the publicly accessible models people use to generate images were trained using other people's artwork without their consent. It's a glaring issue in ethics, and obviously one that's close to home for an instance full of artists who've had their work scraped by crawlers that pass on the data to things like Stable Diffusion for training.
As such, from this point forward, no AI art is allowed on .art. If you want to post AI art, there are plenty of other instances that don't regulate posting it, and you can create an account on one of those.
We're aware that there are some grey areas, like people who generate and then heavily modify AI art to use in work that's otherwise their own and where those lines of ownership might begin/end, or people training AI on their own art but given how prominent the ethics issue is with the training models right now, and the lack of transparency from a lot of models on where they got their training data, we're keeping the rules tight and all-encompassing. If, in future, some models emerge that are verifiably trained ethically without infringement on existing works, we will re-visit the rule.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
54 replies, 2565 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (15)
ReplyReply to this post
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops in my time"
blogslug
Jan 2023
#6
No, AI is like telling someone else to create a collage. It's fake creativity.
highplainsdem
Feb 2023
#15
I'm confused. It isn't true, it has been going on for 500 years, and its really bad?
Voltaire2
Feb 2023
#30
It isn't true that "just about every major artist uses assistants" - which is what
highplainsdem
Feb 2023
#33
There's not inherently wrong with AI, anymore than there is anything wrong with phone cameras.
Ms. Toad
Feb 2023
#18
None of the challenges you mention have been met, though, and so far there's been
highplainsdem
Feb 2023
#22
We all drive cars that can go much faster than speed limits, but there are
highplainsdem
Feb 2023
#24
This is just like what the music world said about sequencers and samplers in the 1980s
Recursion
Feb 2023
#41
There is little or no art in giving instructions to AI. You could take words
highplainsdem
Feb 2023
#44
Whats that sentence that art-snobs say to people who question their own favored method of art?
Lancero
Feb 2023
#45
And you need to be skilled to spin the words to get the AI to output what you need...
Lancero
Feb 2023
#49