I get that socialists will naturally be sympathetic to artists who often are not well compensated for their labor. However I think it’s also important that we understand that in order to make a living, independent artists rely heavily on intellectual property law. As such, they tend to want to categorize all AI art as unoriginal and derivative of existing works.

Unfortunately I think that’s a bit of a liberal argument. It ascribes some ineffable quality to human creativity that AI cannot replicate. In doing so it obfuscates the process by which the state creates and enforces a market for intellectual property. Therefore, I don’t think it’s particularly useful argument for socialists to make.

That’s not to say “AI” companies aren’t exploiting the work of unpaid artists. That is definitely still true. We just need to be advocating for solutions that go beyond what capitalist markets can offer.

[–] NuraShiny@hexbear.net 3 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

You know all those people on this site and others, begging for money to survive the next month because of various reasons? I think they really put too much stock into the capitalist concept of money and should stop giving so much stock to something that's bad.

Is this really your take? That people within capitalism have to not use what little scraps of recourse they are given to have some sort of moral high ground? Really? Fuck you. People need money to live in the current shitty times and if there is a way to get money, they need to engage with it, because the alternative is that they starve and die. This really shouldn't be hard to understand. Artists rely on a shitty system to make their money because it's the only path available to the within the current shitty system. The legal system also sucks and yet it is the only recourse for people who get fucked over by corporations. Should they also stop trying to get some manner of justice because the system sucks? I guess we should all lie down and die, because the system sucks.

SO yea, what the fuck are you talking about with solutions that go beyond the capitalist markets? How about we DESTROY these immoral, terrible markets and get us a good system of government?

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

What are you even talking about? This is the least charitable and most absurd interpretation of what I said.

[–] NuraShiny@hexbear.net 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh no am I being uncharitable to someone okay with fucking over normal people because of a technicality? Sorry not sorry.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Why are you assuming I’m okay with fucking over normal people? That’s just absurd lol.

[–] NuraShiny@hexbear.net 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Because the vast majority artists are normal people and you are telling them to eat dirt because copyright law sucks?

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago

I’m not telling them to eat dirt. I get there are people out there who just tell artists shit like “Artists just have to learn the new AI tools and if you don’t that’s on them.” We can agree those people suck. I am not one of them.

I agree that AI just mimics the patterns found in existing works of art. I agree that companies making money off these AI models are in a round about way exploiting the labor of artists who often struggle to make a living. I agree artists should engage in political activity to the degree that they can to fight for what they deserve.

That said, I am arguing that relying on copyright law and capitalist concepts of private property are not the avenue for artists to get what they deserve. That doesn’t mean I think artists should just accept the status quo. It also doesn’t mean I fault anyone, especially artists, if they disagree.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (66 replies)