The problem with this tools is they don’t protect human art, they protect human art into a capital liberal economic framework.
Artists prefers to show lesser quality of their work to the audience, because with glaze the change is noticeable as artefacts, rather than changing the way they diffuse their art.
You want justice ? Start acknowledging the fact that internet isn’t anything alike physical space therefore art can and should be shared and used wieldy. Second fact is the way artists are making money is still based on art rarity, which online is just inapplicable bullshit and it’s actually a form of cultural domination. It’s a model made for physical works, not online ones.
insightful comment. just one small criticism: there are a lot of artists out there who happen to exist within this capitalist economic system, who need to sell their art for money so that they don’t starve or become homeless. and these people probably don’t want their art and their style to be reproducible by ai because that would threaten their ability to house and feed themselves.
I’m all in favour of abolishing intellectual property, but only as part of a broader change to our economic system that would allow artists to support themselves without having to worry about ownership. besides, these ai tools aren’t really ‘sharing’ art, they’re just allowing big tech companies to consolidate wealth and power
finally, your point about art rarity is not really relevant to the discussion, these tools are intended for people distributing digital art, not people speculating on physical art
The problem with this tools is they don’t protect human art, they protect human art into a capital liberal economic framework.
Artists prefers to show lesser quality of their work to the audience, because with glaze the change is noticeable as artefacts, rather than changing the way they diffuse their art.
You want justice ? Start acknowledging the fact that internet isn’t anything alike physical space therefore art can and should be shared and used wieldy. Second fact is the way artists are making money is still based on art rarity, which online is just inapplicable bullshit and it’s actually a form of cultural domination. It’s a model made for physical works, not online ones.
insightful comment. just one small criticism: there are a lot of artists out there who happen to exist within this capitalist economic system, who need to sell their art for money so that they don’t starve or become homeless. and these people probably don’t want their art and their style to be reproducible by ai because that would threaten their ability to house and feed themselves.
I’m all in favour of abolishing intellectual property, but only as part of a broader change to our economic system that would allow artists to support themselves without having to worry about ownership. besides, these ai tools aren’t really ‘sharing’ art, they’re just allowing big tech companies to consolidate wealth and power
finally, your point about art rarity is not really relevant to the discussion, these tools are intended for people distributing digital art, not people speculating on physical art