Technology

40303 readers

262 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

remington@beehaw.org

224

Greg Rutkowski Was Removed From Stable Diffusion, But AI Artists Brought Him Back - Decrypt (decrypt.co)

submitted 2 years ago by trashhalo@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org

196 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Greg Rutkowski, a digital artist known for his surreal style, opposes AI art but his name and style have been frequently used by AI art generators without his consent. In response, Stable Diffusion removed his work from their dataset in version 2.0. However, the community has now created a tool to emulate Rutkowski's style against his wishes using a LoRA model. While some argue this is unethical, others justify it since Rutkowski's art has already been widely used in Stable Diffusion 1.5. The debate highlights the blurry line between innovation and infringement in the emerging field of AI art.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Rhaedas@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago (15 children)

they charge money to generate his style of art without compensating him.

That's really the big thing, not just here but any material that's been used to train on without permission or compensation. The difference is that most of it is so subtle it can't be picked out, but an artist style is obviously a huge parameter since his name was being used to call out those particular training aspects during generations. It's a bit hypocritical to say you aren't stealing someone's work when you stick his actual name in the prompt. It doesn't really matter how many levels the art style has been laundered, it still originated from him.

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 10 points 2 years ago (14 children)

It is unconditionally impossible to own an artistic style. "Stealing a style" cannot be done.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Is drawing Mickey Mouse in a new pose copying the style or copying Mickey Mouse?

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The second.

I'm not sure how that's relevant here, though. There is nothing at all being copied but an aesthetic.

[–] tqgibtngo@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

There is nothing at all being copied but an aesthetic.

Although to me it is interesting that, even without literal copying, a generator might be capable of potentially emulating some key features of a specified source. Can this sometimes arguably extend beyond just "an aesthetic"? We've all seen examples similar to this one (from the SD online demo, default setting, with a familiar public-domain source) — https://i.imgur.com/PUJs3RL.png

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)