189
‘Mass theft’: Thousands of artists call for AI art auction to be cancelled
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2025
189 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
38082 readers
398 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It would be kind of funny to offer AI schlock for sale and then give the buyer a framed copy of the prompt instead of the print itself
I would respect that as a kind of performance art.
Prompt, seed, model, LORAs, and better hope it's a sampler that reliably produces the same results each time for the same input as not all of them do.
Nah, inability to produce the actual image is the point. All the "artist" did was type in a box, so that's all the purchaser gets.
In principle all samplers are deterministic because they use PRNGs, any and all actual non-determinism you see is due to GPUs, underlying acceleration libraries playing fast+loose with numerical accuracy. Which they do because the models are generally robust against noise which is exactly what lacking numerical accuracy (or quantisation) is, but you can get into situations where, on direct comparison, it does make a difference.