The question about the legal and moral aspects of training on works of other artists is related, but a different discussion.

    • Thorny_Insight@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      One who wrote the prompt. It may be the AI that does all the heavy lifting but it’s still a tool and alone it doesn’t create anything.

      • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        But the person who wrote the prompts didn’t create anything. With AI there really is no “artist”.

        • Thorny_Insight@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          How did they not create anything? They inserted a prompt into the tool and received a picture.

          • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            They had a rough idea and left it to the AI to make any sense of it and “create” something.

            • Thorny_Insight@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Painters can either splash paint on the canvas or spend months working on a photorealistic masterpiece. There’s absolutely a difference in skill needed for both but to claim the former is not art would also be gatekeeping.

              That argument also disregards the actual difficulty of crafting the perfect prompt to get the AI to output what you want it to. Anyone can create pictures with it but it’s not trivial to get it to create exactly what you want.