Are we allowed to like AI art?

[NopeNopeNopeNope]

I heard of some country allowing its citizens to copyright their own face so that it can’t be used in AI without their consent

Seems interesting, otherwise this shit gonna get crazy outta control

[shovelquest]

At this point I can envision a future that is like startrek where nobody goes to the movies anymore and nobody plays video games and everyone does science and enjoys the finer things of human history with AI.

Or I can see a trash dystopia where everyone roots for copywrite laws and restrictions and try's to hold back our technologically creative spirit so we can keep slurping up dirt social media advertisments music and other dogshit we call entertainment now days.

[NopeNopeNopeNope]

Originally Posted by shovelquest [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

At this point I can envision a future that is like startrek where nobody goes to the movies anymore and nobody plays video games and everyone does science and enjoys the finer things of human history with AI.

Or I can see a trash dystopia where everyone roots for copywrite laws and restrictions and try's to hold back our technologically creative spirit so we can keep slurping up dirt social media advertisments music and other dogshit we call entertainment now days.

Will the utopia also involve us somehow fixing having the collective attention span of a fruit fly?

Because as it stands now (almost) someone can make an AI video of you doing something just creatively terrible/disturbing enough but still be believable, and use it to ruin your reputation, maybe not amongst your closest family, but with anyone else that knows you

Then when your campaign to prove the original was fake finally concludes, people won’t care about the update, nor will the update get circulated

It already has been proven. Lie in an article, and 80% or so of people will miss the update

[Ekco]

we'll get both, breakaway civ to mars of the good/non busted people

madmax/cyberpunk for the rest.

[NopeNopeNopeNope]

Plus that’s just malice-intent reputation ruining

If I was a singer or performer, I would be pretty upset with someone selling AI generated songs with my likeness and voice, me being something God created that AI couldn’t have copied had I not existed

Copyrighting ourselves is probably inevitable to prevent mass theft. And then there’s still malicious use, like mailing an AI video of someone beating their girlfriend to the gf’s family or something

[shovelquest]

Originally Posted by NopeNopeNopeNope [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Will the utopia also involve us somehow fixing having the collective attention span of a fruit fly?

Yes that type will rot in basements until they are extinct and nobody will care and the go getters will be out there have a great time.

[shovelquest]

Originally Posted by Ekco [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

we'll get both, breakaway civ to mars of the good/non busted people

madmax/cyberpunk for the rest.

Yeah, there will always be homeless people who chose to be homeless because they like that lifestyle.

But.. over time a homeless person of the future would be indistinguishable from a rich philanthropist today.

[Ciderpress]

Originally Posted by NopeNopeNopeNope [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It already has been proven. Lie in an article, and 80% or so of people will miss the update

This is depressingly true, might even be more than 80% of people.

Write slanderous untrue headline and blatant opinion piece disguised as "news", issue correction like three weeks later in fine print. Damage done, and you still get to claim you're a journalist cause you "corrected" the record.

[NopeNopeNopeNope]

Adding new meaning to “high kick”

[Reiwa]

Originally Posted by Ciderpress [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is depressingly true, might even be more than 80% of people.

Write slanderous untrue headline and blatant opinion piece disguised as "news", issue correction like three weeks later in fine print. Damage done, and you still get to claim you're a journalist cause you "corrected" the record.

Journalists are journaling in their journals, not reporting the news.