| ▲ | janalsncm a day ago | ||||||||||||||||
> That's true of all the best artists ever. Just to play Devil’s advocate for a moment, why should we require human artists to be held to the same standards as automated software? We can make whatever rules we want to. A human might implicitly copy, but they are not infinitely scalable. If I draw a picture that in some way resembles Buzz Lightyear I am much less of a threat to Disney than an always-available computer program with a marginal cost of zero. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | jMyles a day ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> why should we require human artists to be held to the same standards as automated software? Isn't this the same question as, "why should we allow general purpose computing?" If the technology of our age is our birthright, don't we have the right to engage whatever mathematics we find inspiring with its aid? > If I draw a picture that in some way resembles Buzz Lightyear I am much less of a threat to Disney than an always-available computer program with a marginal cost of zero. ...that sounds like a good argument in favor of the always-available computer program. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||