This chat had a lot in common with Who Framed Roger Rabbit. And I might mean how there’s a mix of live action and cartoon characters in the same scene.
I have to imagine he's also fine with the Spectator feeding all his work into an artfully crafted AI and then using it to generate his brand of whatever it is he does and getting rid of him. If the AI output is "good enough", his value is gone. I know I would rather deal with an AI version of him.
Wow. I can’t believe how well you kept your dignified cool up against that. I watched this on my way to work increasingly fizzing with rage. Fortuitously my bus just deposited me at the NGS in which I shall now decompress for a few minutes.
A lot of this feels very much like the debates in the 80's and 90's about "Remix Culture", and how far inspiration, fair use and appropriation can go before it becomes straight plagiarism.
Entitlement looks like intelligence to other entitled people. Your authenticity and explanations landed. Copyright is the current legality and it protects you so of course he doesn't like that
You're one of the few individuals who could entice me to watch (or read) anything to do with The Spectator these days. But. Well. Because it's you...let's see.
It’s on in the background right now. I’m up to where the other chap decides the best way to prove his point is to start patronising you. Which I admit is engaging…but…well, not doing him, or AI art, any favours.
He (I didn't catch his name, and given the performance, I'm not going to go and remind myself 😂) did have the basis of at least an interesting discussion/debate/exploration on the topic with you, but the epic scale of rudeness is an instant dismissal. Sorry you had to sit through that. Cheers!
I thought I was finished commenting on this but I just heard "I don't believe in copyright, I'm a libertarian." and my head almost exploded with a combination of rage and amusement. It's now worth it all just for that magnificent and astounding statement. Bravo!
At the beginning, he did seem to be making an interesting point about how artists could use AI. But so rude & mischaracterising! & then he disappeared up his own backside in a cloud of snobbery & idiocy about copyright. You have the patience of a saint.
You did as fine as you could with a man who refused the reality surrounding GAI and posited an imaginary use-case that doesn’t exist to support his weak position.
the fact you managed to restrain yourself from ripping Igor to shreds is very impressive. Possibly the slimiest individual I've ever had the displeasure of hearing speak, in a non political debate.
his total disregard of the rights of artists to their ideas, makes my blood boil
I know they will. They are about to look at issues relating to copyright, ethics, etc. too. Well done on keeping calm! PS without giving away too much my view on the matter my dog is called Hogarth!
I had to bow out when he mentioned he was anti copyright... there's no winning with those folk. But everything you said was great, thank you for suffering his incorrect annalysis of genAI and how it works, and what it is to be an artist.
Once he gets into ranting about “lumpen proletariat” artists I knew what kind of dude this was. Graphic Design might not be art every day of the week but it’s noble craft and social value…he outright rejects that and it’s kinda gross
I'm under no pretence of the level of what I do, but for me, it comes down to the ethical usage and value of human labour, which I felt he cared for neither - which speaks volumes. Well done to Bendor for calmly putting up with such nonsense!
Like I mean the copyright system is all broken like god it’s bad…
Like big corporations running it and basicly makeing rules just to keep themselves at the top…
But scrapping it all? Yet clameing your agenst big companies doing art?
You know big corporations are the only ones who benefit right… 🤨
I can't take anyone against copyright seriously these days. That's like being against worker protection laws. There are problems with copyright, sure, that are usually the fruit of the laws not being strong enough. Anti-copyright gives off a "we need to deregulate markets" energy.
Wow the AI dude was so pompous. AI graphics can be interesting but there is no thought behind it other than the original human art it copies and pastes from. There is no original thought in AI.
Interesting. It's the problem with having killed the author, isn't it? If what matters is the reader/viewer's encounter with the surface of the work, then you don't need any of that messy intentionality / humanity. I do mean 'if'.
Yes, agree. I think I’m optimistic on this point; most people do want that messy humanity. But we’re about to find out, over the next half decade say, and if they don’t, then tbh we’re stuffed… 😬
Oh dear. If Igor ‘I’m a libertarian’ Toronyi-Lalic imagines that an artist writing their own code is of any artistic significance at all, he’s the one misunderstanding AI. Does Penguin include a copyright notice in his book, I wonder - or is that too last century?
He wanted to take cheap shots at people who pursue art and weren't masters. Because AI has I believe he believes it "elevated him" to the status of a master which is just a riot
👏Your restraint was admirable. I was actually shouting expletives at the screen!
It was satisfying when you said something along the lines of "you've lost me there" after his waffling about Bach.
If he'd revealed he was anti-copyright at the start you'd have been better armed for his nonsense.
Comments
his total disregard of the rights of artists to their ideas, makes my blood boil
Like big corporations running it and basicly makeing rules just to keep themselves at the top…
But scrapping it all? Yet clameing your agenst big companies doing art?
You know big corporations are the only ones who benefit right… 🤨
That is a joke right?
Please tell me that’s a joke…
I would never scrap what little rights we have, not with how alt-right the world is.
AI models seem to me to be following the drug pusher philosophy - get people dependent on them for free, then jack up the price.
It was satisfying when you said something along the lines of "you've lost me there" after his waffling about Bach.
If he'd revealed he was anti-copyright at the start you'd have been better armed for his nonsense.