Post

I agree! I didn't mean to snark (if I did)!!

It’s disgraceful. Your image is art and the AI image is very obviously not. (I can see that’s not much consolation when someone is stealing from you, though)

It’s a statistics machine so it can make something that resembles a photo as the source material contains a lot of photos.. I guess not so many people draw like you 😊

Jesus Christ what an incredible photo. Not the point, I know, but it's stunning.

to play devil's advocate: is it theft if it's clearly worse in quality? is it the exact same thing anymore? musicians have been dying on this hill for a long time (vanilla ice, auto tune, pop in general) but shitty copies of "the real thing" are not maligned the same way as a detriment to society

Class Action Lawsuit

Yes, but there is no way to stop it.

plus, it's ugly and completely uninteresting, bc: who wants to communicate with machines instead of ppl?

Your photo is amazing 😍

An altogether inferior copy too; what's even the point (don't respond anyone I know what the point is lol)

What he said!

Couldn't have said it better myself

I get it, but I also think change is inevitable even if we as humans aren’t built to be ready for it. I do think AI is progression. Every craftsman has protested the coming next thing. I’m sorry change impacts people negatively but I’m not willing to limit progress from moving forward.

It's naturally colonial in nature too www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2...

www.georgesazo.com/blog/earth-i...

Environmentally dangerous and drives up consumer prices for energy, too. www.technologyreview.com/2024/05/23/1...

OMG I had no idea! Effing bad.

Turns out AI doesn't need to nuke the world to destroy it.

Your image is so much better @nateinthewild.com Take some (small) consolation in that.

Justice system is not working. Rich and evil corporations are getting free pass..

Adobe updated its EULA to require your permission to use work created with their products to train AI, and word on the street is AutoCAD was gong to do something similar

Your image is so much better than the AI version.

Earning a follow from me for this post nate! Well said and we are In unfortunate times.

Your photo is incredible 👏

The only lipidvore on the planet/ eats the fat and leaves most of the meat for other animals like artctic fox or sea clean up crew. Sorry you got ripped off. Original is absolutely stunning.

credit to @dynamoe.bsky.social

If I were you, I'd be majorly pi$$ed at having my work stolen.

I mean this post specifically is about a thief using AI to steal from me

Your photo is absolutely incredible, and the AI generated image is a masterclass in how to turn something incredible into something boring, plastic, lifeless, meaningless. I can't put my finger on why it has that effect, but it's amazing to see it portrayed like that.

It also looks way worse.

How do we differentiate between inspiration and plagiarism?

🤬

This isn't the point, but yours is also better

Photographers are learning they don't own the world and their perspective is just that

How do you make it focused in the foreground, blurred in the mid-range, then focused in the great distance again?

😲 This is theft, pure and simple. The basis of AI is stealing the work of others.

I have a bit of distaste for People with patents and those holding copyright Yes, you contributed to society, well done, let others build on it People refusing to have their work use without payment hold society back for selfish reasons You took a good picture, AI improved it. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Your image is clearly the better one. No doubt whatsoever.

Though AI can't do citations - it can make things that look like citations, but they never actually exist.

They eventually changed their system to prevent this but it was a look behind the curtain, that reveals it's clear plagiarism. This image example should be of interest to a lawsuit somewhere. There are a few of those lawsuits in AI music, not sure whether there's a similar effort for image AI

Exactly. I'm following this issue for AI music and there's a legal reason they're going with the word 'trained' (because copyright law has a few things to say about 'copied', and they're trying to stay far away from that concept).

Powerful artists like Metallica and Alanis were the ones whose testimony put Napster in the grave. Smaller artists whose live shows benefitted from free online distribution actually tried to defend Napster, but the big money won out. As it usually does.

Idiotic false equivalency and bad history. What shut file sharing down was Apple launching the iTunes store, which the labels fought until Jobs stepped in. CDs were overpriced junk sold off singles. Bad, yes, but consistent w trash music biz practice. A.I. is far worse on all levels.

You're absolutely not wrong and your image is waaay better. AI might have a place for determining the viability of a drug or an F1 car component. It shouldn't be within a million miles of art.

The only thing we can do is to not upload images and don’t use google or Amazon cloud.

That's what they said about bitcoin.

And your image is more interesting

I'm so sorry. I will always ever only support art made by humans for as long as they tell us. My fear is they won't.

I have to see the good oh AI

It is theft but the AI's image is based on many different images it has been trained on. The images used as training data should be made available and used for stopping AI companies from doing this by having pay damages to anyone that has had their images used as training data without permission.

You're absolutly right. There is no justification for Al generated imagery. Soon all what we are fed with will be fake. Fake news, fake images, fake history. Even a fake president... Ups... Did I say soon?

It’s happening, after Adobe changed things it won’t be long before they won’t need a photographer with a camera, that was probably their aim.

And yours is just so much more real and better in all the way and it’s the uncanny valley of it all that trains the eye towards authenticity so we have that…for now

📌

And the AI image looks bad, compressed and bland. So much effort and they made an absolutely shitty copy

AI just read The Golden Compass and got inspired. 😂

I hate AI, it’s disastrous.

I suspect this is theft by the person prompting the generator (albeit in a way entirely encouraged by the platforms). I tried a prompt aimed squarely at your photo, but without reference image and got things like this:

By the way, I am not disputing that the AI creators were unethical in the way they harvested their training sets, and yes, AI will do environmental harm and traditional artists will be disadvantaged. It has yet to be seen whether the nett value to society is positive or negative.

If I can find a stock image of a polar bear under an aurora, would I be justified in claiming one of you were a plagiarist?

Yours is much cooler.

(I don't think my original post linked correctly, this should work tho)

That’s disturbing

It’s deeply upsetting that this is being normalized because giant corporations stand to lose billions if they aren’t allowed to steal human creativity.

I hate everything about AI

Extremely unsettling how convincing the AI is

The AI image looks like a stuffed toy bear stood in front of an unravelling leek. Yours is beautiful.

#AI_Is_Evil

That's why it's in ()

Its plagiarism, which from my time at Uni, were they would do a don't steal work directly, it's a criminal offence, would mean the Plagiarism Machines are literally just theft. Data is still owned by the creator, using it without license (or sourcing) is plagiarism, and that is theft.

That’s a disingenuous argument. I didn’t put a “restriction on its use for training data” when I shared it because AI IMAGERY DIDNT EXIST YET. This explosion of AI imagery happened practically overnight before any of us had a chance to react, or invent a time machine.

I agree with you to a point. If the T&Cs on every Apple, Google, Facebook log in says “we can access and use everything delivered by your phone” which includes every image on there, every piece of data, everything it hears or records whether you know it or not, is that right? I agreed. But really?

If the laws haven't caught up, then it is by dint, not illegal as there isn't a law expressly prohibiting.

Yup. AI violates copyright and intellectual property rights and make money from doing so. And no one seems to care. Canadian news outlets are suing chatgpt to copyright but that will probably take years to play out.

Way to miss the point, entirely AND be a total jackass about it.

neither is real bsky.app/profile/nafn...

If his was the only aurora pic with a spiral configuration, and the model contained only his image of a bear, then I’d say he had a case. I can’t tell polar bears apart, so this could be identical. To a polar bear, the ML version might look nothing like the bear in the original photo.

Well, I guess not posting reference to the used model and disclosing the prompt, are pretty telling signs. But it sure got some traction nonetheless.

It is definitely giving CGI polar bear vibes.

Agree 1000% I am going to screenshot your post and use it to reply to every AI image I see on here.

The issue, simply, is that AI can deconstruct any image and its digital data and rebuild a brand new image exactly like this. The new image is unique and new and can bypass any copyright legislation. Until they get a grip on this, all our work is under threat. In the meantime, protect your work!

*Nor there is an abstract...

Right, I have heard something along those lines. 🙏

To begin with, your pic is magical. The bear appears mesmerized by the scene unfolding above. 🤩 Secondly, AI is really starting to piss me off 🤬

It took A1 the power in half a mobile phone battery to render it.

Age of misinformation and THEFT!

I like your original much better.

Well this is despicable! I recommend you start using Nightshade and Glaze so if they try to use your photos to train an AI it will ruin the AI

At the very least we need legislation that requires AI art to be labeled as such. If I saw the image on the left my reaction would be “wow”! If I saw the image on the right, knowing it’s AI generated and not real - meh.

Your image is absolutely fantastic. Honestly, as a photographer, I prefer to see a photo someone took, not manipulated. Fact vs Fiction.

I think it could be a useful technology someday, but it isn’t ready for general usage yet. It makes sense that AI would need to learn in order to create, but at this point, it can only make inferior rip-offs and people are passing off entering prompts as artistic talent.

This is wrong. Stealing your artistic output.

AI is theft