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.