SydneyInPeril posted at 9:48 PM Sun, 4 August 2024 - #4488048

RHaseltine posted at 3:34 PM Sat, 3 August 2024 - #4488013

In fact daz was very clear that the images used were its own store images in their blogs and, as I recal, in the emails.

It should have said so on the page for the generative engine. Not in a blog (that not everyone will have read) or in emails (which not everyone will have received, I know I never got any).

Basically, the indication of what the engine is trained on wasn't posted as visibly as it should have been. Hence, we have to make assumptions, and the assumption trained into us that it's being trained on whatever happens to be vacuumed up, whether it be from everywhere, or from all site posted content via changes to the TOS.

I will also comment that @DarkElegance has a view pretty close to my own. I like Studio over Poser. But my friend has had experiences regarding the mentality of the moderators when they pushed back on the advertising on the gallery thing, that they told me made it felt like they were being expected to couch 100% of their commentary in a very non-aggressive way or shut up, which caused them to delete all of their content in response and walk away from it.

So, there is a layer of reality that has been excluded from the conversation. Daz will say they "trained the AI with their own data" but that's only the top layer of data, the frosting. The underlying layer is made of stolen data, the same as every other AI generator out there. There are no ethical data training sets. They're all based on mass theft. That's because it takes billions of images and enormous volumes of text and enormous computing power to make the ai "smart enough" to do anything with the layer of frosting on top, the actual Daz data.

It all goes back to the Laion data sets. It's well documented that those are made of stolen data. Of course, you're not allowed to say "stolen data" on Daz site because it implies that some company did something wrong - Which of course all the AI companies did when they stole everything from everyone on the internet to train their AIs under the false auspices of research and fair use. Now the AI companies are making money off it and the AI industry has billions and billions of dollars being pumped into it. This apparently makes it all ok because we're all just little people dumb enough to share our work on the internet. So, it's ok to steal from us. And it is theft. When a company takes our work and incorporates it into their AI training data sets without our consent or compensation, that's theft. It was also ok to steal from famous artists and from Stephen King, too.

There are a few artists attempting lawsuits, but who knows how those will go? I do not expect much in the way of legal remedy. It is known that AIs have a habit of regurgitating parts of or entire works in its output. And it is known that earlier models are used as the starting point for later models, and it is pretty much impossible to remove the stolen works from the data set. So, once it's in there, it's in there.