Remember how we were told that genAI learns “just like humans”, and how the law can’t say about fair use, and I guess now all art is owned by big tech companies?

Well, of course it’s not true. Exploiting a few of the ways in which genAI --is not-- like human learners, artists can filter their digital art in such a way that if a genAI tool consumes it, it actively reduces the quality of the model, undoing generalization and bleading into neighboring concepts.

Can an AI tool be used to undo this obfuscation? Yes. At scale, however, doing so requires increasing compute costs more and more. This also looks like an improvable method, not a dead end – adversarial input design is a growing field of machine learning with more and more techniques becoming highly available. Imagine this as sort of “cryptography for semantics” in the sense that it presents asymetrical work on AI consumers (while leaving the human eye much less effected).

Now we just need labor laws to catch up.

Wouldn’t it be funny if not only does generative AI not lead to a boring dystopia, but the proliferation and expansion of this and similar techniques to protect human meaning eventually put a lot of grifters out of business?

We must have faith in the dark times. Share this with your artist friends far and wide!

  • @Amoeba_Girl
    link
    English
    910 months ago

    yeah man i love to look at detailed depictions of art

    • @Amoeba_Girl
      link
      English
      14
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      also sorry i need to get this out

      50 years ago, you’d need several talented musicians, an array of expensive instruments and recording equipment to make a song.

      no. you can make up a song and you can sing it and it doesn’t cost anything. i’ve done it since i was a child and humanity has done it since before history began. fuck you.