mstdn.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A general-purpose Mastodon server with a 500 character limit. All languages are welcome.

Administered by:

Server stats:

16K
active users

#copying

1 post1 participant0 posts today
Replied in thread

#ByStarkContrast...

#MyFormTutor was also #MyChemistryTeacher; he was a #DreadfulTeacher...

#HisIdea of #Teaching was #Copying #TheText from #SomeoneElse's #Book onto a #Blackboard, while 23-#Students were #Expected to #Copy what he'd #Copied into our #OwnBooks... And, #Magickally; #TheLearning would #JustHappen...

#HisApproach to #Teaching #SetMeBack 3-#Years; but #NoOneCares about that, either... He's #DeadNow and #MyDoctorate is in #Engineering...

#So... #IT's #AllFine...

🧙☕🤖:wolfparty:🤖☕🧙 | :fediverse:🦹:PirateBadge:​​🦄:PirateBadge:​​🦹:fediverse:

So this has been very frustrating. Apparently there's a known #issue with the #NTFS #drivers on #Linux (Linux #Mint) which #cause your entire #computer to #lock-up and #freeze when you are #copying a lot of #files to/from an NTFS #volume.

And what am I doing? I'm trying to copy all my data OFF my old NTFS volumes so I can re-format them as ext3+luks.

This is going to kill me. I've got a LOT of data to copy and I'm literally having to
^Z the terminal window every few seconds and pause the operation so my computer won't lock up.

Because I'm serious y'all, say what you want about
#Windows but #Windows11Pro never locked up and froze on me just because I was #copying some damn #files! 👿

Edit: I even niced the shit out of this too.

Process priority of 19. (nice)
IO Nice class "best effort"
IO Nice priority of "7"

Shit is still locking the fuck up.

Is copying a form of flattery? different to other topics as I have tried to look this up.

Well, yeah? It means someone has liked your stuff enough to essentially copy it or be inspired by it. Whenever I hear it in pop songs, I have to wonder whether it's copied or stolen, because both have two different intents behind it. People mistake copying for stealing which isn't always the case.

My view on it is generally to do with the intent. There are such a thing as happy accidents which is why there can be similar sounding chords and keys in songs. Likewise in art, brushes and colour palettes.

I can understand if my work was stolen and profited on, I would be pissed. Since my intent is not profit, it goes against my wishes and essentially crushes my dreams. Which is why you'll likely never find me funded or published by a corporation.

Which is to say, if I inspire people or am somehow good enough to be copied from, thank you.

Continued thread

I now see "#Music labels sue #AI companies #Suno, #Udio for US #copyright #infringement"

reuters.com/technology/artific

The labels asked the courts to award statutory #damages of up to $150,000 per song the defendants allegedly copied. They accused Suno of copying 662 songs and Udio of #copying 1,670.
The #lawsuits are the first to target music- #generating AI following several cases brought by authors, news outlets and others over the alleged misuse of their work

Replied in thread

@highvizghilliesuit

Copyright covers it.

Search/social media companies show a #snippet of the #article, and #link back to the original #site to read the full #article. That's fine, and shouldn't need #payment.

But if they're #copying more of the original article than is necessary for that purpose, eliminating those visits to the original site and benefiting #commercially, they're #violating the site's #copyright, and should pay #damages and #penalties for that.

As an early advocate for AI (Artificial Intelligence) I get some pushback from people who don’t know anything about the technology and who just want to persecute the entire idea of AI anything. They argue AI text responses are wrong; they bray that AI images are stolen. I have little patience for having a conversation with those types of Luddite deniers because, in the end, their arguments are both boring and wrong. Here’s why.

The one thing that trips up these AI deniers is that AI learns just as we do: through exposure to information and by exploring the relationships of experience. We may not be aware that the piece of Art we saw in the museum inspired our own “original” creation later, perhaps even years later; but if we are being direct with ourselves, we have to confess there are no ideas that are fresh and original. Everything has already been created and published — we just may not know it yet due to geography, education, and lack of exposure.

AI serves to compile and process vast amounts of information, making it more readily accessible and condensing it into an instantly discoverable experience. AI doesn’t steal Art; instead, it draws inspiration from existing art and transforms it into something new — a process that mirrors human creativity, even if we don’t always recognize it. Merging two ideas to create a novel concept is not copying or stealing but rather reflects the age-old human method of internalizing and reinterpreting information. While we might believe we are inventing something groundbreaking, our work is often rooted in previously established ideas.

When the portrait painters began to notice this new thing called photography was taking hold around 1840, the painters said the same thing about photographers what many “artists” today are saying about “AI Art.”

“Oh, a camera is just mechanical. There’s no art to it.”

“Photography is just copying, it isn’t original like what I paint.”

“A camera is not a human mind, so it cannot create originality.”

That was the thinking back in 1840, and now, today, instead of painters vs. photographers, we now have NFT Artists claiming AI Art is “stealing” their stuff and that AI Art is mechanical and uninspired. Sound familiar? Today, photography is considered original, and important Art; and one day, the same will be said about AI generated Art.

These issues always come down to prestige and money. “I’m better than you. You’re stealing from me!” A year ago, an NFT artist could sell a 1/1 image for $3,000. Today, an AI Art Bot can create hundreds of thousands of original images for a fraction of that price. Times and conditions change, and the professional artists are using AI to their advantage to create even more spectacular Art. They are not just changing with the times, they are taking advantage of the technology to make their lives even better!

It’s the small-timers, the small-minded, and the perpetually perplexed, who complain about all AI because they fear the inevitable: AI will beat them in every comparable way — unless they, too, change and adapt — but they instead want stasis. They want the world to remain stolid and cold for them, just like them.

When it comes to AI Bots and their text — so many people are ready to leap at the AI answers to find flaws. Every human being has flaws. AI is in its infancy, so to pick apart an AI text answer — without providing a correction — is the same as beating up on a child for not knowing something. AI will only get better, smarter, and faster, with time. I decided to ask ChatGPT-4 Plus for its answer to AI work being copied and stolen. ME: What is the best answer to the accusation that AI Chat and AI Art is just stealing and copying? ChatGPT: The accusation that AI-generated chat and art is simply stealing and copying can be addressed by acknowledging the concerns and providing a broader perspective. It is true that AI systems like GPT-4 rely on existing data to generate output, but it is important to recognize the value they bring to the table. Here are some key points to consider:
  1. Transformation and recombination: AI systems process and transform the input data in novel ways, generating output that can be unique and original. The algorithms learn patterns and structures from the data, but they do not simply copy-paste existing content.
  2. Creativity as a collaborative process: AI can be seen as a tool or a partner in the creative process, providing new perspectives, ideas, and inspiration to human creators. Artists and writers have always drawn upon the work of others for inspiration, and AI can be seen as an extension of this tradition.
  3. Expanding access to creativity: AI-generated chat and art can democratize access to creative resources, enabling people who might not have had the means or training to produce high-quality content. This can empower individuals and communities to express themselves and participate in the global creative landscape.
  4. Ethical considerations: It is important to address ethical concerns around AI-generated content, such as crediting original sources, respecting copyright laws, and ensuring transparency about the use of AI in the creative process. By addressing these concerns, the conversation can shift from simply “stealing and copying” to responsible and innovative AI-assisted creation.
  5. Continuous evolution: AI systems are constantly evolving and improving, with the potential to develop more sophisticated creative outputs in the future. As AI technology advances, the distinction between mere copying and original output may become less relevant, opening up new possibilities for human-AI collaboration in creative endeavors.

If human artists were more forthcoming about revealing their sources of inspiration, the Art world would undoubtedly become a more harmonious environment.

I encourage you to seize every opportunity to interact with AI — through text, chat, and Art — so you can witness firsthand the potential it holds. AI is not our adversary; instead, ignorance and fear are the true foes. Embrace the challenge of experimenting with novel experiences, and you’ll uncover a vast array of possibilities awaiting your exploration.

Share this:

#ai #art #chatgpt #copying #creativity #innovation #inspiration #midjourney #photography #text

https://bolesblogs.com/2023/05/06/ai-art-is-real-art-and-not-stolen/

David Boles, BlogsQuestions Answered by NFT Artists | David Boles, BlogsIt was an honor to be one of 10 in the world to be involved with the initial Alpha Test of Facebook’s support of NFTs — digital collectibles — between June 27 and July 22. During …

One of the world’s most cited scientists, Rafael Luque, suspended without pay for 13 years

Researchers are #evaluated by the #number of studies they #publish in #peer-#reviewed journals and by the number of times these papers are #cited by other colleagues.

The well-intentioned mechanism, however, has produced adverse effects, as explained by the British engineer Nick Wise, a researcher at Cambridge University who, in his spare time, seeks out fraud in science.

Wise has uncovered shady “#factories of scientific studies,” produced by #copying and #pasting other studies or by automatic #text #generators, and whose authorship is secretly #sold for hundreds or thousands of dollars to inflate resumes.

“I found a study by Rafael Luque whose authorship had previously been offered in a group on [the messaging platform] #Telegram,” Wise said

english.elpais.com/science-tec

EL PAÍS English · One of the world’s most cited scientists, Rafael Luque, suspended without pay for 13 yearsThe prolific chemist, who has published a study every 37 hours this year, has been sanctioned by the University of Córdoba over his research work for other institutions in Russia and Saudi Arabia