A new tool lets artists add invisible changes to the pixels in their art before they upload it online so that if it’s scraped into an AI training set, it can cause the resulting model to break in chaotic and unpredictable ways.

The tool, called Nightshade, is intended as a way to fight back against AI companies that use artists’ work to train their models without the creator’s permission.
[…]
Zhao’s team also developed Glaze, a tool that allows artists to “mask” their own personal style to prevent it from being scraped by AI companies. It works in a similar way to Nightshade: by changing the pixels of images in subtle ways that are invisible to the human eye but manipulate machine-learning models to interpret the image as something different from what it actually shows.

  • regbin_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Disagree. It’s only unethical if you use it to generate the artist’s existing pieces and claim it as yours.

      • 9thSun@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t see how AI training couldn’t be considered transformative as the whole idea is to consume input, break it down into data, and output something new. The way I’m understanding what you’re saying is like this: Instead of only paying royalties when I try to monetize a cover song, I’d have to pay every time I practiced it.

          • 9thSun@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t understand how you’re separating the the generated artworks from the AI that’s generating the work, but I do see your point. If a company puts out a tool for free I don’t think they should be on the hook for someone using that and creating a product. At the end of it all though, I think whoever has made any hard financial gains should should payout whoever contributed.