/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6445237
How the fuck are you so illiterate that a genuine question comes off as a bot? Are you that fucking retarded?
You imply and accuse of crimes, yet you do not deign yourself to make an actual legal case and only parrot whatever everyone else is saying;
>OMG ILLEGAL ILLEGAL AI BAD ILLEGAL WOW LIKE LITCHERALLY WOW PLS PRAISE ME FOR PARROTING THE GOOD VIRTUES
Again, make a fucking case. Present it and go to court with it.
If AI is actually "stealing" artwork as in;
>replicating them 1:1 and passing it off/selling as its own original work
you would have a point.
Saving pictures is not stealing.
Same as an artist being influenced by other artists in their actual original work is not stealing.
Read up on the fucking laws and what you're actually allowed to do in the realm of artistic expression.
>It does because it's literally within the bounds of the algorithm, it cannot go outside the source provided to make a real original piece.
Can you, as a human, do something you don't even know how to do? How do you get the knowledge to be able to know how to do something? You just extract it from the ether?

If the algorithm has no directive and no "goal", how the fuck is it supposed to pursue the function it has been programmed to do?
>inb4 but AI is not human and humans can think
Still not making that fucking argument that AI is the same as humans.

Again, can you prove with actual laws and shit that ai is committing a crime?
Or hire a fucking lawyers, you clown.

You will very quickly notice that the only people who are complaining about AI art generators are the worthless hacks who've wasted decades 'practicing' art instead of making it; the kind of people who only make art to get money, get famous, get attention, get whatever it is that they want. They're the people who make art because they expect something in exchange, and never make art because they truly want to make art.
Seriously. Keep mental tabs of who's doing it.