tinytrills

[tinytrills]

[tinytrills]

Consider this: the difficulty in describing Lorkhan could be due to the fact that his death damaged or erased the part of reality that he represents. Describe a colour that no-one has ever seen before; very difficult, isn't it? Lorkhan is that colour, ripped from the world by his own death.

[tinytrills]

Shoutout to my dad who accidentally moved into an up and coming black lgbt neighborhood and was very disappointed to learn that all of his “new friends” weren’t actually interested in how to use iNaturalist or where he saw coyotes on his walks 😔🙏🏻

[tinytrills]

Mutuals line up I'm giving you all one of these bad boys

[tinytrills]

someday i will write an essay on the way fandom likes to recreate the exact same flavor of aggressively heteronormative relationship dynamics in every popular slash ship ever invented regardless of how the characters behave or interact with each other in canon.

[tinytrills]

"it's all in your head" correct! unfortunately I am also in there

[tinytrills]

[tinytrills]

please only follow this blog if your soul is 'resplendent' tier or above

[tinytrills]

Embarrassed myself a few days ago and since then I've been periodically going like this

Ignore the part where he gets naked that's not part of it.

[tinytrills]

[tinytrills]

the only time of the year this can be posted

[tinytrills]

In response to 1: You are correct that I did not articulate a right held by an artist against an AI developer that would exclude them from using the artist’s work. I feel this right exists but I do not have the time or desire to write an essay about it. We may have to agree to disagree on this one

In response to 2: I assumed that OP was talking about works not generally accessible, as otherwise their argument of dataset security wouldn’t really matter.

My original reblog was mostly just to point out that the argument of “it’s secure” does not address the ethical claims regarding the act of downloading in and of itself

Also please read all of this in a polite tone because my ass is not good at conveying that in general and I’m not really pressed about this.

on the other end the copyright argument against ai art is just so bad. I hate how that's the most common one people use, like I'm sorry but an interpretation of copyright law that classifies images made with generative ai as "plagiarism" or "theft" would be a worst-case scenario for everyone except the walt disney corporation

[tinytrills]

Things I did not say:

Fan fiction is bad/wrong

That there is no difference between use of published media by big corporations and the use of published media by individual artists, or “small” artists, if you will

That there is no difference between the borrowing of ideas/styles from art and the exact digital replication and analysis of the art by a non-human publisher

There are lots of important points you made! I simply wasn’t talking about them. The things I did say were

Hey your Defense doesn’t address the claim

Just because an AI’s training data is secure doesn’t necessarily mean it should have that data in the first place

on the other end the copyright argument against ai art is just so bad. I hate how that's the most common one people use, like I'm sorry but an interpretation of copyright law that classifies images made with generative ai as "plagiarism" or "theft" would be a worst-case scenario for everyone except the walt disney corporation

[tinytrills]

By use I mean to train the ai on the image. Transformative works should be allowed but training the ai on it strikes me as being similar to baking a cake (transformative from the ingredients) without paying for the ingredients (the art). I can’t speak on the US copyright law as I’m writing from outside the US but I should also note that the law and what is ethical don’t always overlap

on the other end the copyright argument against ai art is just so bad. I hate how that's the most common one people use, like I'm sorry but an interpretation of copyright law that classifies images made with generative ai as "plagiarism" or "theft" would be a worst-case scenario for everyone except the walt disney corporation

[tinytrills]

While I appreciate the nuance given here and agree with it on several points, I do want to say that the response given to “It’s unethical to download images from the internet without the copyright holders’ permission” doesn’t actually address the claim.

Simply because a well made generative ai (which as an aside, there is no guarantee of this being the case from the standpoint of the average consumer OR the artists whose work is being downloaded without permission) does not release the training data still does not give the creator of the ai the right to use the artist’s work, especially if they intend to profit off of said work.

There’s a separate argument to be had about whether there is a moral imperative to LET someone else profit off your work but that’s tangential to the point here

on the other end the copyright argument against ai art is just so bad. I hate how that's the most common one people use, like I'm sorry but an interpretation of copyright law that classifies images made with generative ai as "plagiarism" or "theft" would be a worst-case scenario for everyone except the walt disney corporation

[tinytrills]

scared to get bottom surgery because what if im really bad at having a dick. like what if i yank it too hard and it comes off. what if i dont take good enough care of it and i have my penis license revoked. what then

[tinytrills]