Post

Would you be willing to apply the same standard you pick for users to yourselves? I don’t condone your use of AI art, even internally. You host a community of artists. I don’t mind LLM coding, that’s distinct from genAI art, but apply it fairly. Allow categories 1-5 for creators and VRChat equally.

Curious why coding gets a pass? I see this all the time - people want to protect artists, but developers are thrown under the bus. LLMs can code for the same reason that they can create pictures - they've stolen billions of lines of code to learn, with no attribution or compensation.

AI art fully replaces the artist. If you generate a fursona instead of a commission, that’s direct job displacement. Code is not like that. Software is never finished, tools that accelerate development don’t replace programmers, instead they improve their speed and capabilities.

As for the training data argument, largely it is the same story. Artists almost universally do not condone training on their art, while in programming, open source and the free sharing of ideas is commonplace. There is of course complications and nuance, like licensing concerns, but that’s the gist

Sure, if the coding license is honoured. But it's not. They grabbed millions of lines of GPL code and shoved it in there. No copyleft was honoured. No share and share-alike. No "must not be used for commercial purposes". That £200/month Claude license was built on "protected" code.

Yes this is a real complication, that the models might output some protected code snippets without the accompanying required license. Honestly, I have a lot of problems with how these companies trained their models. I’m not condoning their behavior, we ought to sue and regulate the hell out of them.

0 reposts1 like

No replies yet.