News Microsoft engineer begs FTC to stop Copilot's offensive image generator – Our tests confirm it's a serious problem

[jp7189]

So far, no copyright has been granted to anybody trying to request for it, under the grounds that ownership and creation must be made by a human. People can still have ownership of everything else not using AI on it, yes. For example, you can make a music, and make the cover with AI. The cover is not yours, but your music work is still yours.

Any modification you make to AI is yours (this does not makes the whole work yours, just the modified portion and extent), but the output from the AI itself is not yours. Any inspiration you can obtain from AI and work you do with it can also be yours, as long it is not blatantly similar to somebody's else while being aware of this (the concept of awareness is very important for plagiarism).

I think we're arguing different things. I don't care about copyright, or making money on the images. I'm saying, for my own personal enjoyment, I can now take ideas from my head and make them real for others to enjoy. I don't have artistic talent and could not do this any other way before. This opens up a whole new creative outlet for me, and I love it.

 

[randyh121]

Make your own AI.
Stop using these big ai's that censor your content.
It's not that hard to do.

 

[USAFRet]

Make your own AI.
Stop using these big ai's that censor your content.
It's not that hard to do.

May we see and interact with an AI that you've created?

 

[randyh121]

May we see and interact with an AI that you've created?

No. It's hosted locally on my machine

 

[CmdrShepard]

Remember the calls to ban Photoshop in the early 2000s? That’s what you people sound like.

Photoshop does not come preloaded with a knowledge of all artistic styles and all images ever created, and it most certainly isn't capable of drawing anything if you yourself lack the skill.

Stop pretending to care about the little guy and being against big corps when you’re so pro-copyright. Copyright protects the wealthy and powerful - and font creators (sad, miserable individuals).

Those same "big corps" would be against this if it was their copyright that was misused. Since it's the copyright of photographers, artists, writers, they just don't care and that should be telling you that you are on the wrong side of this argument.

Worst take (and comparison) on AI in this thread by far. AI companies are not paying hundreds of millions of dollars for ad to promise you riches. Your analogy is very inaccurate.

So Microsoft investing $10bn in OpenAI, pushing CoPilot into every product and marketing it really loudly as the future of computing is just a coincidence? I don't think so. I find it interesting that you feel threatened by the comparison I made because that means it is working as intended in debunking what AI is all about -- another tech grift like crypto.

I think you’re very confused about AI, (tech) companies and tech in general.

Not really, I am working in and following the trands of the IT industry for 35 years. I think that gives me a pretty good start on understanding how things work.

Gonna leave this thread now because I know your position now and you know mine and there’s no changing each other’s minds on the fundamentals of the issue at hand.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Just a note from recent history: The people in your camp, who try to destroy a specific technology that doesn’t align with their political preferences, have always lost that fight.

I am not sure whom you are lumping me with but I am not trying to destroy anything.

What I am saying is that if big corps can't make an AI without using copyrighted material, then they can either:

- Not make an AI

OR

- Pay to license said copyrighted material and make an AI

Outright stealing stuff because you can't make your product without it should NOT be an option.

We hear so much about the dangers of AI from journalists, because they are incredibly afraid that it will make their jobs redundant (I sure hope so).

Real dangers of AI are not in replacing journalists but I don't expect someone with such a limited imagination to understand what they are and I am too tired to list them here for you.

If you hate journalists so much, doesn't reading their articles and commenting on them make you a hypocrite?

I'd say yes, but I doubt you even know what that means.

 

[Ralston18]

Please be forewarned: There is no need to be insulting or otherwise abusive to other posters.

This Forum has rules and the rules will be applied as necessary.

Civility is required.