I don't care what they think but it's terrible how they devalue the work of actual artists this way. What enables these "artists" is copyright abuse by the company that made dall-e. Without exploitation of actual artist work there would be no dall-e. As long as we condone such copyright abuse those "artists" will flourish
So if there was DALL-E but not trained on copyrighted data, that would be ok?
Previously you mentioned that a tool never solves a problem. Also you said that "whoever puts forward the problem can be credited with solving it". So it would indeed be the "AI artists" "creating" the images that deserve all the praise...
> So if there was DALL-E but not trained on copyrighted data, that would be ok?
Sure why not? But all original artwork is copyrighted by default. So dall-e operator would have to negotiate paid deals with every artist. artist will get a fair compensation or understandably tell them to f^^^k off.
> Also you said that "whoever puts forward the problem can be credited with solving it". So it would indeed be the "AI artists" "creating" the images that deserve all the praise
They are using a tool that is literally powered by copyrighted work of other artists though, right?
If you have a problem and you come up with solution that breaks the law, sure you still solved the problem but you still broke the law.
If you have a problem of delivering a product on time and you have to run a red light because you are late you have solved a problem but not in an acceptable way. Same here.
