| ▲ | slidehero a day ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
>There's no reason why training on a billion images is any different You gloss over this as if it's a given. I don't agree. I think you're doing a different thing when you're sampling billions of things equallly. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | codedokode a day ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
The root problem is that the model reproduces Indiana Jones instead of creating a new character. This contradicts the statement that the model "learns" and "creates" like a human artist and not merely copies; obviously a human artist would not plagiarize when asked to draw a character. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | TremendousJudge 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
That's why I said it's an argument by induction. Where's the limit for it to be different? 10 images? 100? 10000? Where does it stop being copyright infringement and why? Many people have paid heavy fines for much less. I don't think that "a billion images is so unfathomable compared to just one million that it truly is a difference in kind" is a valid response | |||||||||||||||||||||||