• solrize
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago
    edit-2
    5 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    Not necessarily. There’s been a lot of advances in watermarking AI outputs.

    That presumes that the image generation is being done by some corporation or government entity that adds the watermarks to AI outputs and doesn’t add them to non-AI outputs. I’m not thrilled that AI of this sort exists at all, but given that it does, I’d rather not have it controlled by such entities. We’re heading towards a world where we can all run that stuff on our own computers and control the watermarks ourselves. Is that good or bad? Probably bad, but having it under the exclusive control of megacorps has to be even worse.

    • Grandwolf319
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      0
      ·
      5 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      How about any photo realistic image without a watermark is illegal? And the watermark kind of has to be traced back to author so you can’t just add it to real CP?

      • solrize
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        0
        ·
        5 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        If you can generate the watermarks, you can put them on non-AI images.

        • Grandwolf319
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Well the watermark would be a kind of signature that leads back to a registered artist.

          I think it makes sense to enforce this for all AI art, basically label it in a way that can be traced back to who produced it.

          And if you don’t want people to know you produced it, then you probably shouldn’t share it

          • solrize
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            0
            ·
            5 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Sorry but the concept of a “registered artist” sounds dystopian.

            • Grandwolf319
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              It would be for using AI, not creating art.

              I’m just brainstorming here, but I can’t imagine how you would control AI art without some sort of regulation or licensing on the side of the AI creator

              • xmunk
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                0
                ·
                5 months ago
                link
                fedilink

                You’re quite correct your thinking it seems unrealistic to actually detect AI generated imagery after the fact so the only fill solution would be a trusted chain of custody - it wouldn’t necessarily need a centralized authority but it would require some highly trusted issuers of trust and, unfortunately, trust in media is currently at an all time low and those companies are in the best position to serve as those issuers.

                This is a very complicated problem and we need a social (rather than a technical) solution.