UNstable Diffusion and their crimes - Art theft | Copyright violation | Lies

Vixen with Scissors
17 Dec 202206:17

TLDRThe video script discusses the controversial topic of AI-generated art, specifically focusing on 'Unstable Diffusion' as a model that creates hyper-realistic images from text, often using pieces of existing artists' work. The speaker, an artist themselves, argues that this practice is not art but theft, as it infringes on legal rights and lacks the ethical training on data sets. They highlight the potential risks of data security and the commercial exploitation of personal images, questioning the value of imitating life and art without the essence of originality and soul. The speaker urges viewers to consider the importance of respecting creative work over the pursuit of pretty images.

Takeaways

  • 🎨 AI-generated art is a controversial topic, with some viewing it as theft of artists' work.
  • 🖌️ The technology behind unstable diffusion allows for the creation of hyper-realistic images from text inputs.
  • 🚫 The main issue lies in the potential legal and ethical infringement when AI is trained on non-ethical datasets.
  • 🌐 There are numerous apps and websites offering AI-generated art services, but their legality and ethics are questioned.
  • 💰 The commercialization of AI-generated art can lead to financial gain, but also raises concerns about copyright and ownership.
  • 👤 Artists' rights are at risk, as AI-generated art can undermine their legal and personal claims to their own creations.
  • 🔒 Data security is a concern, with the potential for personal images to be sold to companies without consent.
  • 📈 AI technology, particularly in the field of art, can progress rapidly and potentially get out of hand if not regulated.
  • 👎 The speaker personally tried an AI art generation tool and found the results to be questionable.
  • 🌟 The importance of valuing original human creativity and respecting the work of others is emphasized over the pursuit of pretty images.

Q & A

  • What is the main concern of the speaker about AI-generated art?

    -The speaker is concerned that AI-generated art, specifically using the unstable diffusion model, is essentially theft as it generates images by using pieces of other artists' work without permission.

  • What does the speaker suggest is the proper term for AI-generated images?

    -The speaker suggests that AI-generated images should not be referred to as 'art' because they are created by imitating existing artworks rather than through original creative expression.

  • How does the speaker feel about technological advances in general?

    -The speaker is a big supporter of technological advances and integrating them into daily life and art processes, provided that they are used ethically and do not infringe on legal rights.

  • What is the issue with AI-generated art in terms of data security?

    -The issue with AI-generated art in terms of data security is that personal data, such as images of one's face, can be quickly sold to companies, and users do not retain ownership of the AI-generated content.

  • What is the significance of the 'AI logo' mentioned by the speaker?

    -The AI logo signifies that a piece of content is AI-generated. The speaker's own experience with 'The Time Machine' from their heritage indicates that this logo should not be removed, serving as a reminder of the source of the artwork.

  • What is the speaker's personal experience with AI-generated art?

    -The speaker tried 'The Time Machine' from their heritage and found the results to be questionable at points. However, they used it as an inspirational tool rather than as a piece of finished art.

  • What is the potential risk of AI-generated art according to Jurgen Smithfield?

    -According to Jurgen Smithfield, AI-generated art technologies pose risks in the very near future, and they could go out of hand very quickly, especially in the context of data security.

  • How does the speaker view the role of artists in the context of AI-generated art?

    -The speaker views artists as the victims of AI-generated art because it infringes upon their legal rights and can devalue their original work.

  • What is the main message the speaker wants the audience to take from the video?

    -The main message the speaker wants the audience to take is the importance of respecting others' work over the pursuit of creating pretty images through potentially unethical means.

  • What is the speaker's stance on the use of AI-generated art for inspirational purposes?

    -The speaker is open to using AI-generated art for inspirational purposes, as they did with 'The Time Machine', but emphasizes that it should not be mistaken for original art.

  • What is the speaker's view on the uniqueness and authenticity of AI-generated art?

    -The speaker believes that AI-generated art lacks uniqueness and authenticity because it is an imitation of existing art, and thus, it has no 'soul'.

Outlines

00:00

🎨 AI Generated Art: Innovation or Infringement?

The speaker begins by addressing the audience and expressing their strong opposition to AI-generated art, specifically the 2022 model known as 'stable diffusion.' They argue that this technology, which creates hyper-realistic images from text, is essentially theft as it uses pieces of other artists' work without permission. The speaker shares their personal experience as an artist and criticizes the use of AI in art creation, advocating for the support of technological advances but emphasizing the importance of ethical data sets and legal rights. They mention their own trial of 'The Time Machine' from their Heritage and clarify that while they appreciate AI for inspirational purposes, it should not be mistaken for original art. The speaker also raises concerns about the potential misuse of personal data, as seen with the prominent AI art app 'Lancer,' and the broader implications for data security.

05:01

🤖 The Soulless Imitation: AI vs. Authenticity

In the second paragraph, the speaker continues the discussion on AI-generated art, emphasizing the lack of soul and authenticity in these creations. They argue that AI art is merely an imitation of real art, lacking the essence of human creativity. The speaker also touches upon the negative outcomes of AI in other contexts, such as LinkedIn's failed attempt to generate marketing campaigns from prompts. Concluding the discussion, the speaker poses a philosophical question to the audience, urging them to reflect on the importance of valuing genuine human work over the pursuit of creating pretty images. The speaker signs off, leaving the audience with a thought-provoking message and anticipation for the next video.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡UNstable Diffusion

UNstable Diffusion refers to the controversial AI-generated art models that have been criticized for potentially infringing on copyright laws and unethically using artists' works without permission. In the context of the video, it is portrayed as a digital grave robber, stealing the intellectual property of artists and undermining the value of original artwork.

💡Art theft

Art theft in this context refers to the act of using AI to generate images that are derived from the works of other artists without their consent, effectively 'stealing' their creative property. The video argues that such AI-generated art is not a form of creation but rather a form of theft, as it takes existing art and repurposes it without the artist's input or consent.

💡Copyright violation

Copyright violation is the unauthorized use of copyrighted material, which is a legal issue that the video highlights as a significant concern with AI-generated art. The video suggests that AI models like UNstable Diffusion may be infringing on artists' legal rights by creating derivative works without proper licensing or ethical data training, leading to potential legal disputes and harm to the original creators.

💡AI-generated Arts

AI-generated Arts refer to the use of artificial intelligence to create visual art that mimics human creativity. In the video, the speaker expresses a strong opposition to this practice, arguing that it is not a genuine form of art but rather a theft of other artists' works. The video emphasizes the importance of original human creativity and the ethical concerns surrounding AI's role in the art world.

💡Dr Victor Frankenstein 2022

Dr Victor Frankenstein 2022 is a metaphorical reference used in the video to describe the creators of AI-generated art models like UNstable Diffusion. The reference is to the fictional character from Mary Shelley's novel 'Frankenstein', who creates a monster without considering the ethical implications. In this context, it suggests that those developing AI art models are creating something potentially harmful without fully understanding the consequences.

💡Hyper realistic pictures

Hyper realistic pictures are images generated by AI that are incredibly detailed and lifelike, to the point where they can be indistinguishable from photographs or actual artworks. The video discusses how AI models like UNstable Diffusion can produce such images from text descriptions, raising concerns about the authenticity and originality of art in the age of advanced technology.

💡Ethical data set

An ethical data set refers to a collection of data that has been gathered and used in a manner that respects legal, moral, and privacy standards. In the context of the video, the speaker argues that if AI-generated art models were trained on ethical data sets, meaning that they only used public domain or properly licensed works, then they could be used for inspiration without infringing on artists' rights.

💡Heritage time machine

The Heritage time machine is mentioned in the video as an example of an AI tool that the speaker has personally experimented with. It is implied to be a service or application that generates AI art based on user inputs, such as a person's face or style preferences. The speaker notes that while the results can be interesting, they should not be considered as art and should be used only as an inspirational tool, not replacing the value of human creativity.

💡Data security

Data security refers to the measures taken to protect digital information from unauthorized access, corruption, or theft. The video raises concerns about the potential risks to data security posed by AI-generated art platforms, particularly in relation to the personal data of users. The example given is that of a prominent app using stable diffusion, where there is a risk that personal images could be quickly sold to companies, highlighting the need for robust data protection measures.

💡Jurgen Smithfield

Jurgen Smithfield is presumably an expert or authority figure mentioned in the video who has voiced concerns about the potential risks of AI-generated art technologies. The video suggests that according to Smithfield, these technologies could pose significant threats in the near future, particularly in the context of data security and the rights of artists and individuals whose likenesses are used without consent.

💡Imitation of life

The phrase 'imitation of life' is used in the video to draw a parallel between robots and AI-generated art. It suggests that just as robots mimic human behavior, AI-generated art mimics human creativity. The video argues that such imitation lacks the soul and originality of genuine human art, and that it is important to value and respect the work of real artists over the production of AI-generated imitations.

Highlights

AI generated Arts are being compared to a digital grave robber, likening Dr Victor Frankenstein 2022 to the unethical creation of art.

Unstable Diffusion, a model capable of generating hyper-realistic pictures from text, is criticized for using pieces of other artists' work without consent.

The speaker, an artist themselves, asserts that AI-generated art is not genuine art but an act of theft.

AI-generated art is popularized through various apps and websites offering to create images based on personal likeness or chosen aesthetics.

The ethical concern is raised that if the AI model is not trained on an ethical data set, it commits thievery by infringing on legal rights.

The speaker expresses a conditional support for AI in art creation, provided it is trained on ethical data and used for inspiration rather than passing off as original art.

The Time Machine from the speaker's heritage is mentioned as an example of AI in art, with the stipulation that the AI logo must not be removed.

AI-generated art ownership is questioned, especially when using certain apps and websites that may not grant the user ownership of the created art.

Artists are portrayed as victims of AI art theft, facing an uphill battle to retain rights to their own artwork both legally and personally.

The potential risks of AI technologies, particularly in the context of data security, are highlighted as a concern for the near future.

The example of LinkedIn using AI for marketing campaigns based on prompts, leading to disastrous results, is cited as a cautionary tale.

The conclusion is drawn that while robots imitate life, AI art imitates real art, lacking the soul of human creativity.

The importance of respecting others' work over the pursuit of creating pretty images is emphasized as the core message of the discussion.

The speaker invites the audience to reflect on the content and look forward to future discussions in the next video.

Create Stunning Images & Videos in Seconds！

Explore the latest Flux 1.1 model and powerful Flux tools.

Create Stunning Images & Videos in Seconds！Try It Free