Midjourney Accuses Stability AI of Image Theft, Bans Its Employees - eviltoast

According to a recent tweet shared by AI enthusiast Nick St. Pierre, the alleged theft occurred last Saturday. It is claimed that employees from Stability AI infiltrated Midjourney’s database and stole all prompt and image pairs, an action that also caused a 24-hour outage. In response, MJ reportedly banned all Stable Diffusion developers from its services, a move supposedly disclosed internally within the company on Wednesday.

    • Fisk400@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Have you seen those images of a bunch of people overlaid on each other so that shared features become clear and outliers become fuzzy. The result is an average human but it doesn’t actually look like anyone in particular because it’s a human with no striving feature or bold choice. Thats why AI look the same, they all have the same dull parts of real art but none of the interesting bits.

      • hazeebabee@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Thats such a good point i hadnt thought about before. Training data helps the ai know what is most common, so its products tend to be tropy, predictable and a bit bland (which is great for some things). They are often lacking that ooomph that makes great works truely unique and fascinating.

      • tonyn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        Only if your prompts are boring and dull. The more details I add to my prompts, the more unique of a look I can achieve.

        • Fisk400@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Yes, some people don’t notice the creative void in AI because they are themselves hollow humunculuses. They crawl at the edge of the human fire of creation and gather stray embers that hit the dead sands they occupy. Once in a while they find an ember with some faded glow left and they hold it up and say “The more details I add to my prompts, the more unique of a look I can achieve.”

          I pity them because they will never understand true warmth.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Agree and disagree. You actually can get proper art out of those systems, also novelty, but it usually involves leading the AI onto a gradient you can’t reach with mere text prompts. It’s kinda like with riding horses: As a beginner, the horse will judge you an idiot and follow the horse in front of it and not your commands. You have to have both the intention and the skill to lead the horse onto an untrodden path.

            Or, differently put: If a sketch can be art then so can a piece that the AI generated from it, one that was declared adequate by the sketch maker. “Here, machine”, said the human, “I have done my part, I have infused these bits with life, now you do the boring stuff and polish it”.

            • Fisk400@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              I don’t know what part of my answer full of contempt made you think that I am open to the standard tech bro babble?

              I think you are disgusting people and charlatans desperately trying to pretend that you know what art is. Is that a clearer response for you. The first response was a bit too creative so I understand why you wouldn’t understand it.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                I understood you just fine. What you don’t seem to understand is that art depends not on the medium but the creator. Where do you draw the line? If I throw a sculpt of mine not into SDXL but Cycles to render, does it suddenly become art? Or is it still not art because I’m not using a paintbrush, hell I’m not doing a single bit of shading? Do I need to work with actual clay? That clay also has an undo button (of sorts). Does only marble count? What’s your standard? Can you articulate it?

                The vast bulk of AI pictures out there are bland and uninspired because it’s not artists who hit the generate button. It’s as simple as that. There’s also plenty of bland and uninspired oil on canvas out there – not as large a proportion because the craft is not easy to pick up while staying completely artistically illiterate, but it’s still there because artistic expression is not the only reason why people paint. And that’s fine. And so is randos typing “big tiddies” into a prompt box and hitting generate. Noone claims that’s art, but at the utmost that it looks nice.

                • Fisk400@feddit.nu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  You are in no way different from the people typing “big tiddies” into a prompt box and hitting generate. You only sound slightly more intelligent to the other cold husks but to us standing by the bonfire, you look exactly the same. I actually respect the titty people more because they know what they are and dont pretend to care.