Copyright laws protects the ability of copyright holder to make money. The laws were created before AI and now obviously have to be adapted to new technology (like you didn’t really need copyright before the invention of printing). How exactly AI will be regulated is in the end up to society to decide, which most likely will come down who has the better lobby.

And I just disagree that kids stuff means that it should be lower quality. I think it’s just lazy. And while I understand why people are producing bad content - I don’t have to like it or applaud them for it.

Sure (also I can’t think of any examples) - but than again the question becomes more complex and subjective: what is a good kids movie. But really often kids movie is used as an excuse for bad execution, art, storytelling, acting etc. - while I think kids deserve at least the same quality as adults maybe even better - since media has much more influence on children than on adults.

The idea that children don’t deserve good media is kind of wild to me.

Rather obvious punk.

That’s just what comes with internet becoming mainstream so mainstream cultural standards are applied to online conversations. It’s the difference between an opera and a punk club or something.

Photography can be art as well as AI generated images can be art as well. AI is a tool and people can create art with it. But also what is art is completely subjective to the viewer.

Sure, I even do photography professionally form time to time - I just don’t consider it to be a painting.

With this logic photography is a painting, painted at an impossible high speed - but for some reasons we make a difference between something humans make and machines make.

Easy to say that while not being a hostage.

Of course they are, dystopian future novels are just manuals for business people.

It’s not an argument it’s an analogy, that can help understand the argument.

Wtf? Just could not believe, had to check it out for myself. What’s wrong with people.

Came around to read the paper. Indeed very interesting - also not suited to base broader conclusions about coinciosness in insects in my opinion, the idea that culture might be supported by much simpler neuronal mechanisms is fascinating to me. Very speculative it might very well be than that even coinciosness can emerge in less complex systems then previously thought. Also bumblebees are even more dope than I previously thought. Great read thanks.

Still here?

Doubt you will ever know what an appeal emotional logical fallacy is.

Again, we are talking about empathy and you clearly show that you don’t get it. Which was my point to begin with. Sorry mate to be the one bringing you the news.

Dude, I thought you left?

Your probably claiming others would use said artwork to hurt people.

Again if you would have empathy you could just listen to people, what and how they are hurt by deepfakes and understand what the problem is. Since you don’t have empathy, nothing I will tell you would make any sense for you.

Not seeing how your actions are hurting others, despite them even telling you - is mostly related to lack of empathy. Not that complicated, just simple logic.

Sure, what ever helps you masturbate. But again - you can also have empathy with people who it has an effect on, listen to why and how and masturbate to all the other porn out there. But you wont since you lack basic empathy or maybe the whole hurting people is what gets you off in the first place. Not judging.

And I believe if I draw some picture of (let’s say you) and keep it to myself (or with those who consented to seeing said drawing), there is nothing wrong with that.

Sure. But that’s not what happens with deepfake porn sites? They are public.

I would recommend to get some empathy, not bad in general.