Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Artificial Intelligence Developments (ChatGPT etc)

NoXion said:
Now that I don't understand. AI image models don't do anything without a human entering a prompt. They're not autonomous agents like animals are. So what's the difference between me creating an image in Photoshop, versus using an AI model to do it? In both cases my input was needed for the image to ever exist in the first place.

Sounds like a dumb ruling made by someone who doesn't understand that AI image models aren't actually sentient.
Click to expand...
You supplied the brief but subcontracted the work.

The prompt and the art are two separate entities you have copyright on the former but not the latter.

The same prompt will create different art each time as the AI makes the art part of the process
 
Shippou-Sensei said:
You supplied the brief but subcontracted the work.

The prompt and the art are two separate entities you have copyright on the former but not the latter.

The same prompt will create different art each time as the AI makes the art part of the process
Click to expand...

Only an entity defined as a legal person can sign a contract. An image model is not a legal person. I am not employing anyone when using an AI model, I'm using a tool.

It's a stochastic process, sure. But then so is flinging paint at a canvas. You're not going to get the exact same results every time. In fact even with hand drawing, it can be very hard if not impossible to achieve the exact same results over multiple attempts.
 
I believe the court is arguing that you didn't contribute significantly to the artwork in the same way the person who writes a brief for an artist doesn't own the interpretation of the breif that the artist creates you don't own the interpretation the AI has created.
 
Lazy Llama said:
Write a forum post suitable for urban75.net in the style of "editor"
-=-=-


Subject: The Ever-Changing Urban Landscape: A Reflection on Gentrification
Author: UrbanEnthusiast
Greetings fellow urban explorers,
As the editor of urban75.net, I wanted to take a moment to reflect on a topic that has been a constant undercurrent in our discussions over the years: gentrification. Our beloved cities are ever-evolving, but with change often comes a complex mix of emotions and concerns.
Gentrification, in many ways, embodies the dual nature of urban development. On one hand, it can bring revitalization to neglected neighborhoods, breathing new life into once-decaying areas. This can lead to improved amenities, safer streets, and a sense of community pride that is genuinely heartwarming to witness.
However, on the other hand, gentrification can also bring about displacement, rising living costs, and the loss of the unique character that made these neighborhoods so appealing in the first place. It's a challenging issue that requires careful consideration and open dialogue.
I encourage all of you to share your thoughts and experiences with gentrification in your own cities and neighborhoods. What are the positive aspects you've seen? What are the drawbacks? Have you witnessed any successful efforts to mitigate the negative impacts of gentrification?
Additionally, let's remember that our community is diverse, and our experiences with gentrification can vary greatly. It's essential to approach this discussion with empathy and an open mind, respecting the diverse perspectives that exist here on urban75.net.
In the spirit of urban exploration, let's continue to engage in constructive conversations about the ever-changing urban landscape. Together, we can better understand the forces at play and work towards more inclusive, vibrant, and sustainable cities for all.
Looking forward to reading your insights and stories.
Warm regards,
[Your Name]Editor, urban75.net
-=-=-

I remain unconvinced :D
Click to expand...
Uncanny :hmm:
 
Santino said:
Does ChatGPT even know who Ruddy Yurts is?
Click to expand...
“I'm sorry, but I couldn't find any information about a person named "Ruddy Yurts" in my knowledge up to September 2021. It's possible that this person may not be widely recognized or may not exist in public records. If you have more context or details, I'd be happy to try to assist further.”
 
Lazy Llama said:
Write a forum post suitable for urban75.net in the style of "editor"
-=-=-


Subject: The Ever-Changing Urban Landscape: A Reflection on Gentrification
Author: UrbanEnthusiast
Greetings fellow urban explorers,
As the editor of urban75.net, I wanted to take a moment to reflect on a topic that has been a constant undercurrent in our discussions over the years: gentrification. Our beloved cities are ever-evolving, but with change often comes a complex mix of emotions and concerns.
Gentrification, in many ways, embodies the dual nature of urban development. On one hand, it can bring revitalization to neglected neighborhoods, breathing new life into once-decaying areas. This can lead to improved amenities, safer streets, and a sense of community pride that is genuinely heartwarming to witness.
However, on the other hand, gentrification can also bring about displacement, rising living costs, and the loss of the unique character that made these neighborhoods so appealing in the first place. It's a challenging issue that requires careful consideration and open dialogue.
I encourage all of you to share your thoughts and experiences with gentrification in your own cities and neighborhoods. What are the positive aspects you've seen? What are the drawbacks? Have you witnessed any successful efforts to mitigate the negative impacts of gentrification?
Additionally, let's remember that our community is diverse, and our experiences with gentrification can vary greatly. It's essential to approach this discussion with empathy and an open mind, respecting the diverse perspectives that exist here on urban75.net.
In the spirit of urban exploration, let's continue to engage in constructive conversations about the ever-changing urban landscape. Together, we can better understand the forces at play and work towards more inclusive, vibrant, and sustainable cities for all.
Looking forward to reading your insights and stories.
Warm regards,
[Your Name]Editor, urban75.net
-=-=-

I remain unconvinced :D
Click to expand...

Phildwyer chatgpt is also a bit of a let down if I'm honest.
 
A comic song about the death of Princess Diana in the style of George Formby

(Verse 1)
Oh, gather round, folks, I've a tale to tell,
'Bout a Princess we all loved so well,
Diana, she was the people's flower,
But she left us in her final hour.

(Chorus)
Now, she's gone, Diana's gone,
In that Paris tunnel, where she was drawn,
With her kindness and her grace,
She won the people's hearts, what a wonderful chase!

(Verse 2
She'd visit hospitals, hug the young and old,
With a heart so pure, her story's told,
She'd lend a hand, make the world feel bright,
In her memory, let's sing with all our might.

(Chorus)
Now, she's gone, Diana's gone,
In that Paris tunnel, where she was drawn,
With her kindness and her grace,
She won the people's hearts, what a wonderful chase!

(Bridge)
With her smile so bright, and her love so pure,
She made the world feel safe and sure,
But Fate can be a tricky game,
Took her away, though we'll remember her name.

(Verse 3)
In her work for peace, she stood so tall,
A candle in the wind, that's what they'd call,
But now, she's gone to the great beyond,
In our hearts and minds, she'll forever respond.

(Chorus)
Now, she's gone, Diana's gone,
In that Paris tunnel, where she was drawn,
With her kindness and her grace,
She won the people's hearts, what a wonderful chase!

(Outro)
So let's remember her, with love and cheer,
The People's Princess, always near,
Though she's gone, her spirit's strong,
In our hearts, Diana will forever belong.
 
Santino said:
Does ChatGPT even know who Ruddy Yurts is?
Click to expand...

Lazy Llama said:
“I'm sorry, but I couldn't find any information about a person named "Ruddy Yurts" in my knowledge up to September 2021. It's possible that this person may not be widely recognized or may not exist in public records. If you have more context or details, I'd be happy to try to assist further.”
Click to expand...

ChatGPT has "Browse with Bing" now. Internet access, in other words.

1696265502215.png
 
NoXion said:
I was gonna say, I'm pretty sure that ChatGPT 3.5 training data doesn't encompass a rather obscure forum. Is this Bing browsing feature a part of 3.5, or is limited to 4.0 (paid version)?
Click to expand...
I still don't have the image generation / understanding yet (Dall-E 3), but apparently that's coming.

If you have ChatGPT Pro, then this is what you see when you start a new GPT4 chat:

1696278880464.png
If you don't choose the Bing model, then you don't get web answers - just whatever it 'knew' in 2022.
 
Haven't done proper testing yet, but checked this earlier and validated what it told me. It was right.

1696278979078.png

This would be a lot more handy if it was on my phone app. The doesn't have the data analysis or browsing, but it does have voice input/output instead of text.

I heard that OpenAI and Jony Ive are trying to build a screenless phone with GPT inside. Sounds interesting.
 
Fez909 said:
I still don't have the image generation / understanding yet (Dall-E 3), but apparently that's coming.

If you have ChatGPT Pro, then this is what you see when you start a new GPT4 chat:

View attachment 393890
If you don't choose the Bing model, then you don't get web answers - just whatever it 'knew' in 2022.
Click to expand...

I had a look at the Pro version earlier.

I like the sounds of the extra features, and I'm sure the language model itself has also been beefed up nicely, but I'm not sure that I'd like it enough to pay $20 a month. How do you justify the price?

The free 3.5 version has been very helpful with my worldbuilding so far, highlighting gaps in the lore and providing a framework in which to organise things. But all of the conversations are separate from each other, and ChatGPT 3.5 can't cross-reference them. It would be a pretty cool to be able to "link" conversations so that they could be referenced, which would save me from having to keep re-explaining bits of my fictional universe in new conversations.
 
NoXion said:
Now that I don't understand. AI image models don't do anything without a human entering a prompt. They're not autonomous agents like animals are. So what's the difference between me creating an image in Photoshop, versus using an AI model to do it? In both cases my input was needed for the image to ever exist in the first place.

Sounds like a dumb ruling made by someone who doesn't understand that AI image models aren't actually sentient.
Click to expand...
Because the visual working out/problem solving is done by an AI system, which makes the prompter someone who commisions the image, rather than someone who solves visual problems to create an image.

I think the ruling is correct, having worked with AI systems a few years ago (albeit things like analysiing API calls to and from an image recognition system from an XR app) and as someone who draws etc daily.
 
Last edited:
ohmyliver said:
Because the visual working out/problem solving is done by an AI system, which makes the prompter someone who commisions the image, rather than someone who does solves these visual problems to create the image.

I think the ruling is correct, having worked with AI systems a few years ago (albeit things like analysiing API calls to and from an image recognition system from an XR app) and as someone who draws etc daily.
Click to expand...

It's a tool, not an artist. You no more "commission" an AI to draw you something any more than you "commission" Paint.exe to colour fill in a shape for you. There's no dialogue between commissioner and artist, you're entering a series of variables into software in order to produce an output. I believe the fact that Adobe Photoshop now has "Generative Fill" functionality only reinforces the point that AI image models are tools (albeit powerful ones), and not creative agents in and of themselves.
 
NoXion said:
It's a tool, not an artist. You no more "commission" an AI to draw you something any more than you "commission" Paint.exe to colour fill in a shape for you. There's no dialogue between commissioner and artist, you're entering a series of variables into software in order to produce an output. I believe the fact that Adobe Photoshop now has "Generative Fill" functionality only reinforces the point that AI image models are tools (albeit powerful ones), and not creative agents in and of themselves.
Click to expand...
AI turns a text prompt into an image. How is that different from someone saying to an artist 'I want you to draw me a picture of a dog, and make it a german shepard, etc etc'?

When I was little I can remember my mum doing a 2 page watercolour and ink image for a book, which she had to redo from scratch because the person didn't like the shade of the colour blue she used for the sky. How is that different from someone rejecting the output of an AI system because they didn't like an element of it, and changing the prompt slightly to get the output they wanted?

I think it's easy to over estimate the two way nature of 'dialogue' between the artist, and who they're working for if you don't have direct experience of how that actually works in reality.

eta. An artist isn't some sort of superspecial 'creative' being, It's mostly someone who can solve visual problems so that they can make images. Of course post Duchamps that definition only fits a part of what society or the art world calls 'artists', but that definition fits illustrators/concept (not conceptual) artists/storyboard artists/vfx artists/etc etc
 
Last edited:
ohmyliver said:
AI turns a text prompt into an image. How is that different from someone saying to an artist 'I want you to draw me a picture of a dog, and make it a german shepard, etc etc'?

When I was little I can remember my mum doing a 2 page watercolour and ink image for a book, which she had to redo from scratch because the person didn't like the shade of the colour blue she used for the sky. How is that different from someone rejecting the output of an AI system because they didn't like an element of it, and changing the prompt slightly to get the output they wanted?

I think it's easy to over estimate the two way nature of 'dialogue' between the artist, and who they're working for if you don't have direct experience of how that actually works in reality.

eta. An artist isn't some sort of superspecial 'creative' being, It's mostly someone who can solve visual problems so that they can make images. Of course post Duchamps that definition only fits a part of what society or the art world calls 'artists', but that definition fits illustrators/concept artists/storyboard artists/vfx artists/etc etc
Click to expand...
I find the argument gets even more confusing when you consider that Damien Hurst didn't literally put the shark in formaldehyde, he got his assistant to do it.

And the hundreds of little statues for Anthony Gormley's Field of the UK were made by hundreds of different people, not the artist himself.
 
Fez909 said:
I find the argument gets even more confusing when you consider that Damien Hurst didn't literally put the shark in formaldehyde, he got his assistant to do it.

And the hundreds of little statues for Anthony Gormley's Field of the UK were made by hundreds of different people, not the artist himself.
Click to expand...
Right. But they're conceptual art pieces, and conceptual art and copyright is a really interesting grey area (I've done a bit of a search on it and it would seem moot, with some saying that if a work is about the idea, or process it can't be copyrighted, but photographs of the work can, and there's effectively an honour system within the artworld which prevents people copying said pieces, etc etc but it's insomnia-yet-I-must-get-up-at-8am oclock and I need not to go down a 'oooh shiny information' ADHD rabbithole), and isn't the same as commercial/more traditional/more reproducable, work
 
ohmyliver said:
AI turns a text prompt into an image. How is that different from someone saying to an artist 'I want you to draw me a picture of a dog, and make it a german shepard, etc etc'?

When I was little I can remember my mum doing a 2 page watercolour and ink image for a book, which she had to redo from scratch because the person didn't like the shade of the colour blue she used for the sky. How is that different from someone rejecting the output of an AI system because they didn't like an element of it, and changing the prompt slightly to get the output they wanted?

I think it's easy to over estimate the two way nature of 'dialogue' between the artist, and who they're working for if you don't have direct experience of how that actually works in reality.

eta. An artist isn't some sort of superspecial 'creative' being, It's mostly someone who can solve visual problems so that they can make images. Of course post Duchamps that definition only fits a part of what society or the art world calls 'artists', but that definition fits illustrators/concept (not conceptual) artists/storyboard artists/vfx artists/etc etc
Click to expand...

The difference is labour, surely? When I commission an artist, I am enlisting the time and skills of another person. I'm not manipulating a tool by entering a series of values into software, which is what writing a prompt is.

The entities involved are fundamentally different in each case. I think that matters. The outcomes are also different; an artist will apply "common sense" to their brief, whereas an AI model will blindly output shit that makes no sense.

Shippou-Sensei said:
Cars are not horses.

But they did end them.
Click to expand...

There are also no laws against cruelty to cars, and you can't take a horse for an MOT.
 
NoXion said:
The difference is labour, surely? When I commission an artist, I am enlisting the time and skills of another person. I'm not manipulating a tool by entering a series of values into software, which is what writing a prompt is.

The entities involved are fundamentally different in each case. I think that matters. The outcomes are also different; an artist will apply "common sense" to their brief, whereas an AI model will blindly output shit that makes no sense.
Click to expand...
when you commission an AI image creation system to create an image for you, you're enlisting the skills of the people who create and maintain said system, and the skills of the artists that have created the images said system has been fed. Which is why you can use prompts to directly rip off the visual problem solving of living artists like Greg Rutkowski (This artist is dominating AI-generated art. And he’s not happy about it.). It's a tool which subcontracts the act of image creation after all.

It's not like the prompter does any visual problem solving in the act of prompting, so it's fundamentally not the same as say using a tool to fill an area with a colour.

eta
"AI model will blindly output shit that makes no sense" but image creation AI systems have sense baked in based on the artists work that's been scraped to feed the image creation system, just as when I was QAing an image recognition system, doubt was baked in, and sending off an image to it would return a list of things the system thought the image was, along with with a percentage of how sure it was for each response in the JSON response.
 
Last edited:
Fez909 said:
I find the argument gets even more confusing when you consider that Damien Hurst didn't literally put the shark in formaldehyde, he got his assistant to do it.

And the hundreds of little statues for Anthony Gormley's Field of the UK were made by hundreds of different people, not the artist himself.
Click to expand...
It's also important to distinguish between 'fine art' and 'illustration' in that fine artist create and execute the brief, and illustrators are more likely to simply execute other people's briefs.

The use of AI to replace human illustrators in a commercial/corporate context is fundamentally different to the use of AI by a fine artist.
 
I'm not sure if it is fundamental different except in an economic sense.

The intent may different but the process will be similar if not identical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ranbay
Artificial Intelligence Developments (CatGPT etc)
Replies
3
Views
341
Odessa111
O
weltweit
How to do this, or that? Skills etc .. questions and answers
Replies
5
Views
162
weltweit
weltweit
Gromit
Your best ChatGPTs
Replies
19
Views
743
platinumsage
platinumsage
paul russell999
Controlling saturation, etc. for laptop internal webcam
Replies
5
Views
314
paul russell999
paul russell999
T
Hotmail/outlook has stopped bulk delete etc
Replies
9
Views
460
trevhagl
T
Back
Top Bottom