• Potatar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    So I’m gonna execute the code of someone who doesn’t know the first thing about coding on my computer? Great!

    I’d rather have AI art and human code.

    • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I don’t get why you have to go to such extremes here.

      AI is an extremely broad spectrum of tools. Some of them, yes, use stolen graphics to generate derivative graphics. Some of them attempt writing code.

      But others let you create things that would normally require hundreds of thousands of dollars while still retaining the necessary creative input from the author.

      If you are against such tools as the one used in the linked video, I think you should also stand very much against Photoshop allowing people to paint without using actual pigments and oil.

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        39 minutes ago

        Weak comparisons help no-one, photoshop is nothing like LLM’s

        All of the big commercial LLM’s (without exception afaik) have been trained on a large corpus of data that has been obtained by various sketchy and illegitimate means. (some legitimate as well).

        That’s the major difference between the two.

        If you are using a model that has only been trained on legally obtained data, disregard this point.

        I’m not even against competent tool use of LLM’s but please use better arguments.