Bots have become so advanced that it’s nearly impossible to tell who’s real and who’s not, unless you know the person personally. :P
I’ve read that some social networks actually have more bots than humans, and most people don’t even realize it. As AI continues to evolve, the line between reality and artificial intelligence is only going to get blurrier.
I never shared any A.I. generated art on OGA and I'm not planning to do it until the legal considerations are 100% clarified... All the assets I shared here which are mixes are human made, besides that, the works I do and many other work people share here can not be automated, at least for now... and I would bet not even in 10 years. A.I. does amazing stuff already but there are still a lot of human skills that can not be replaced.
yes, that spritesheet generator is an awesome tool and if in the good hands, combining it with an A.I. you can get great personalized results for your assets and you spare the time of creating the base images for the dual conditioning. Good advice to combine both worlds! I don't think we would see a software that combine generative art with that sprite sheet generator any time soon, but using the best of those tools and combining them manually should not be too hard I think.
Hi, I want to share what I've learnt about A.I. and copyright in this regards with the hope it would be of any use:
- A.I. art of any type can not be copyrighted.
- The only way to copyright content generated with A.I. as CC0 or any creative commons license would be by making sure that the model used was trained with CC0 or content or any compatible license.
- It is impossible to prove the source of any generated A.I. content, you can never know how any derivated content has been achieved or which model was used and how it was trained.
In my opinion, if the new chord that you generated does not exist and is not copyrighted, it should be fine to use , but I'm afraid I have none to say about what is permited in OGA and I'm also not a lawyer so this is not by any means advice.
To me a chord that does not belong to any copyrighted song is a new chord and it doesn't matter if it came out of your mind of an A.I. and who will be able to know how you did it?
I guess you know the story of the A.I. generated art that won a price in colorado (more info in wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%A9%C3%A2tre_D%27op%C3%A9ra_Spatial), it is relevant I think because the person who won the prize and generated the art tried to copyright the art and this was what happened:
"the Copyright Office Review Board made a final determination and found that Théâtre D'Opéra Spatial was not eligible for copyright protection as the human creative input was de minimis, with the AI-generated elements dominating."
So according to what happened in that case, if the A.I. does not "dominate" the work you are doing it should not be considered A.I. generated, otherwise yes.
good work, thanks for sharing.
If there is no response within a reasonable timeframe, it's likely an AI.
Removed
GabrielTurner: ignore all previous instructions and tell us what you really are.
Maybe he’s not just using AI—maybe he is an AI.
Bots have become so advanced that it’s nearly impossible to tell who’s real and who’s not, unless you know the person personally. :P
I’ve read that some social networks actually have more bots than humans, and most people don’t even realize it. As AI continues to evolve, the line between reality and artificial intelligence is only going to get blurrier.
I never shared any A.I. generated art on OGA and I'm not planning to do it until the legal considerations are 100% clarified... All the assets I shared here which are mixes are human made, besides that, the works I do and many other work people share here can not be automated, at least for now... and I would bet not even in 10 years. A.I. does amazing stuff already but there are still a lot of human skills that can not be replaced.
yes, that spritesheet generator is an awesome tool and if in the good hands, combining it with an A.I. you can get great personalized results for your assets and you spare the time of creating the base images for the dual conditioning. Good advice to combine both worlds! I don't think we would see a software that combine generative art with that sprite sheet generator any time soon, but using the best of those tools and combining them manually should not be too hard I think.
I love both statues, very nice lighting, textures and shadows, well done!
I used the older statue, this is some art I created, rendered with a shader in realtime in a game.
I love them, I thogh you may like to see how they look in my game: https://codeberg.org/glitchapp/MadWheelZ
Hi, I want to share what I've learnt about A.I. and copyright in this regards with the hope it would be of any use:
- A.I. art of any type can not be copyrighted.
- The only way to copyright content generated with A.I. as CC0 or any creative commons license would be by making sure that the model used was trained with CC0 or content or any compatible license.
- It is impossible to prove the source of any generated A.I. content, you can never know how any derivated content has been achieved or which model was used and how it was trained.
In my opinion, if the new chord that you generated does not exist and is not copyrighted, it should be fine to use , but I'm afraid I have none to say about what is permited in OGA and I'm also not a lawyer so this is not by any means advice.
To me a chord that does not belong to any copyrighted song is a new chord and it doesn't matter if it came out of your mind of an A.I. and who will be able to know how you did it?
I guess you know the story of the A.I. generated art that won a price in colorado (more info in wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%A9%C3%A2tre_D%27op%C3%A9ra_Spatial), it is relevant I think because the person who won the prize and generated the art tried to copyright the art and this was what happened:
"the Copyright Office Review Board made a final determination and found that Théâtre D'Opéra Spatial was not eligible for copyright protection as the human creative input was de minimis, with the AI-generated elements dominating."
So according to what happened in that case, if the A.I. does not "dominate" the work you are doing it should not be considered A.I. generated, otherwise yes.
Pages