I think it’s fair to say they’re are some significant similarities between the two industries. They both focus on large, multi year creative projects with unknown returns. I’m not sure emulating Hollywood is the answer, but they can at least look at how existing Hollywood unions have approached addressing any similar problems

They’re good for the short term possibly. But longer term, people will be wary of getting in too deep with them and will seek out other alternatives. A game engine like unity thrives on large numbers of skilled users and lots of games using the engine. One of those users or games could’ve been the next big win. Now that might go to unreal instead.

My experience from watching lockpicking lawyer is that locks are just social niceties that tell others ‘please don’t go here’ and have no real ability to stop anyone who doesn’t care. Other than the owner who gets locked out by forgetting their own key of course.

This isn’t true with AI generators. You can absolutely draw in a shitty stick figure with the pose you want and it’ll transform that into a proper artwork with the person in that pose. There are tons and tons of ways to manipulate the the output.

And again, we give copyright to artists that incorporate randomness into their art. If I throw darts at paint filled balloons I get to copyright the output. It would be absolutely impossible to replicate that piece and I only have vague control over the results.

These are my thoughts as well. It seems obvious that putting in ‘cat with a silly hat’ as a prompt is basically the creative equivalent of googling for a picture.

But, as you say, that sort of AI usage is just dumb, bottom tier usage. There’s going to someday be a major, critical piece of art that heavily uses AI assistance in it’s creation and people are going to be surprised that it’s somehow not copyrightable under the laws and rulings they’re working on now.

I remember in the LOTR behind the scenes they talked about how WETA built a game l like software to simulate the massive battle scenes, giving each soldier a series of attacks and hp, etc. They then used this to build out the final CGI.

Stuff like that has already been going on for ages and it’s only going to get more murky as to what ‘AI art’ even means and what is enough human creativity and editing added to the process to make it human created rather than AI created.

Predictable? How are people ‘predicting’ those abstract paintings made by popping balloons or spinning brushes around or randomly flinging paint around. Where does predictable come in? Humans have been incorporating random elements into art for ages.

Following this reasoning (it’ll get misused by the American media mafia), it’s simply better off to get rid of copyright laws altogether, and then create another legal protection to artists both against the American mafia and people using image generators to create rip-offs.

Certainly no disagreement from me on this point

You’re ascribing full human intelligence and sentience to the AI tool by your example which I think is inaccurate. If I build a robot arm to move the paintbrush for me, I would have copyright. If make a program to move the robot arm based on various inputs I would have copyright. Current (effective) AIs prompts are closer to a rudimentary scripting rather than a casual conversation.

AI art is derivative work, and claim that the authors of the works used to train the model shall have partial copyright over it too.

To me this is a potential can of worms. Humans can study and mimic art from other humans. It’s a fundamental part of the learning process.

My understanding of modern AI image generation is that it’s much more advanced than something like music sampling, it’s not just an advanced cut and paste machine mashing art works together. How would you ever determine how much of a particular artists training data was used in the output?

If I create my own unique image in Jackson Pollock’s style I own the entirety of that copyright, with Pollock owning nothing, no matter that everyone would recognize the resemblance in style. Why is AI different?

It feels like expanding the definition of derivative works is more likely to result in companies going after real artists who mimic or are otherwise inspired by Disney/Pixar/etc and attempting to claim partial copyright rather than protecting real artists from AI ripoffs.

A photographer does not give their camera prompts and then evaluate the output.

I understand what you’re trying to say, but I think this will grow increasingly unclear as machines/software continue to play a larger and larger part of the creative process.

I think you can argue that photographers issue commands to their camera and then evaluate the output. Modern digital cameras have made photography almost a statistical exercise rather than a careful creative process. Photographers take hundreds and hundreds of shots and then evaluate which one was best.

Also, AI isn’t some binary on/off. Most major software will begin incorporating AI assistant tools that will further muddy the waters. Is something AI generated if the artist added an extra inch of canvas to a photograph using photoshops new generative fill function so that the subject was better centered in the frame?

Companies aren’t run to earn profit based on goods and services generated anymore. They are investment vehicles for wealthy VC to use and abuse until they run them into the ground while they jump to the next disposable company. Someday this will result in no effective company existing anymore, but the investors don’t care.

If governments were actually functioning they’d recognize this danger and crack down on this behavior because it weakens the country as a whole, but most of the politicians are already bought and paid for.

I mean tears of the kingdom make $700 million + and Diablo Immortal made 525 million in it’s first year despite being almost universally rebuked online. Really seems like micro transactions have a really solid, if maybe not top tier return. Lots of companies try to make something like Horizon Zero Dawn and it totally flops instead.

The old ‘most reviews’ sort on newegg.com was honestly the best way to find decent stuff. Well that combined with comprehensive filters to narrow the search down significantly. There are certain products you just can’t successfully search for on Amazon because there’s no way to filter out the irrelevant trash.

I’d be more open to a cashless society if (at least in America) that didn’t mean relying entirely on private credit card companies that offer effectively zero protection under the law.

What do you do for contractors, Doctors, etc?

Sort of. Mostly this is just what happens when you build a platform that allows basically anyone to sell something on it. Local businesses have limited space, so necessarily they needed to limit product to trusted brands/partners/publishers.

Amazon has actually made it possible for self publishing to exist. There are a lot of successful authors now that never would have made it in the old ‘local bookstore buys books from publishing house’ paradigm.

But this of course has also opened the floodgates for scammers which utilize those same indie-friendly options to try to exploit people.

I think the issues are a little more nuanced than just ‘local business good, Amazon bad’. Not that I think Amazon is good, I just think there are real, valid reasons why small bookstores (and their large book publishers) had problems.

Yep. We ran into this issue and we didn’t even do it sight unseen, we were just moving so fast that we got sloppy. It’s hard to continue to be diligent after 30+ failed bids. Ended up with a bid for a house that needed significant and immediate repairs that we couldn’t afford. Ended up walking away and losing our earnest money instead of keeping the house, but we’re much happier for it.

Our budget also continually increased throughout our search. The same houses we were bidding on at the start increased by 50k just in the couple of months spent searching. We only found inventory once we broke into not a starter home budget category. This has resulted in us being pretty house poor to start, but ultimately we plan to stay here for 20+ years so it hasn’t mattered after those lean first few years.

That’s fair. Using moon reader makes the library and store tabs useless. I have the store ‘disabled’ but the tab remains. Moon reader doesn’t like it when I open books via the library tab (creates a duplicate) so I stopped using it. Personally I rarely need to exit the moon reader app, so the base UI really doesn’t impact me much.

Haven’t noticed moon reader hogging the battery. I keep Wi-Fi and Bluetooth off and use a decent amount of backlight and still get a couple of weeks out of it. Which is so much better than the 2-4 days my oasis got.

Part of the reason I love mine is that it supports TTS so I can create my own audiobooks. Currently using Google wavenet to read books to me. This is nice for car rides especially cause I read a lot of books that will never get audio book versions (translated Chinese cultural cultivation fantasy)

I just bought the onyx boox page and I’m not seeing much, if any bloat. It’s a premium ebook reader ($250), but I bought it to replace my aging Kindle Oasis. I use moon reader pro instead of the built in reader. Google Play worked fine straight out of the box. It has a micro SD card slot for more storage as well.

Overall I’m very satisfied with it and it is completely comparable to Amazons premium ereaders (honestly way longer battery life than my oasis ever had).

Time will tell on OS updates, but truthfully I don’t really care much about that. At least until my apps stop working.

As an RTS player who only ever plays for the story and does not care about multiplayer at all, new RTS games with a decent story and gameplay are kind of thin on the ground these days.

I can’t even play C&C RA2 anymore because I can’t get it to run on my PC. Tried several guides, but it refuses to run properly.