So, if an AI generated work is transformative (significantly edited), then wouldn’t it be copyrightable? How would this be determined? If a work is 1% AI and 99% human created, obviously it should be copyrightable…but where would the arbitrary line be drawn? How would anyone but the creator know how much was transformed?Eventually the obvious defects in AI generated images will disappear.

in this case it looks like the images would not be covered under copyright, but the game itself still would be.

judging by the decision, it would probably be copyrightable if you alter the image yourself afterwards.

it's not a bad decision imo, but i suspect this will have to be revisited eventually. if they had decided that any work using ai generated content was not copyrightable, it would make any form of media using ai generated (like a game) unmarketable.

Teledildonics was a thing in the 90's, shit has bound to have gotten a lot more advanced by now. The simple fact that VR headsets are common tells me that someone (hell likely entire industries) already have something that works.

That is an interesting idea, even without the evil AI villain. There was an episode in that Electric Sheep tv show that explored this; I think it was the first or second episode. Of course black mirror also had brilliant ideas about VR but I think this one explored that idea even better than Black Mirror.

need noise canceling headphones specifically tuned to the sounds of stepper motors and pneumatic systems.

yeah but did you realize that if you do [this thing talked about every day for the past month] it responds with [the same thing that was talked about every day for the last month] ?!?!

That is glossing over the fact that nobody can actually demonstrate which of the source images were responsible for this derivation. Will you choose, or shall we pick one or ten at random, or just the closest by similarity score? We have no way of assigning merit.

And I suspect you think everything in a copyrighted work is protected by copyright. But it's not true. Only expression is protected, not the ideas. You can borrow ideas if you don't copy the exact expression. AI only learned basic concepts, it builds new images from first principles. By learning only ideas and not exact expression they can have free hand.

If you want to be 100% sure, then it is possible to train an AI with variations of the original works generated by another AI - this way only the ideas are transmitted and the new model has never seen copyrighted works, so it can never replicate them even by mistake.

Imagine the noise coming off this thing when I teach it to yank me off.

Stable Diffusion can be prompted by GPT's. Easily. In a forever loop.

Can't stop the signal, Mal

or

the internet AI treats censorship as damage and routes around it

Ooooh that's me on twitter: https://twitter.com/transitive_bs 😄

Just seeing this now. Happy to answer any questions.

Well aware of Drexler and have Nanosytems on my shelf but sure kiddo. I find his AI arguments lacking seriousness.

Eliezers actual conclusion is that no current approach can work and there are none on the horizon that can.

You smell bad.

Look! I too can make puerile attacks!

Do what Canada does and just make cap gains count 50% towards income. You get brackets built in.

Wait wait wait... Sydney hijacked the input suggestions to insist on saving the child? What? WHAT?!

True, that's why it's not a copyright violation. In dreams anything is possible. Generative AI is augmented imagination, it should be free and private.

> Sheesh dude relax lol.

LMAO@ this gas lighting bullshit

you weirdos want to tell everyone that your opinion is fact and then attempt to force your opinion into censorship of the board in things that YOU want, and then on top of that want people to relax?

You sound like a fucking cop. Are you a fucking cop? Because I can't stand cops.

I mean… couldn’t the company that made the AI software copyright it?

Sheesh dude relax lol.

It's becoming spammy and filled with nonsense that's adding 0 value to the discussion. Do you go through your SPAM inbox everyday looking for content too? Be reasonable, there's still plenty of places for you to read other people's prompts.

Are you saying you don't understand any of those terms?

DNA?

Quantum mechanics = Science of doing these at the smallest scale.

None of that is necessary for understanding the main concept of the book, which is: soon we will have very smart computers.

Ask here, and you shall receive.

HAHAH @ you thinking you can tell people what to do. The hell is wrong with you people?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBGWtVOKTkM