• Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    How about any photo realistic image without a watermark is illegal? And the watermark kind of has to be traced back to author so you can’t just add it to real CP?

      • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Well the watermark would be a kind of signature that leads back to a registered artist.

        I think it makes sense to enforce this for all AI art, basically label it in a way that can be traced back to who produced it.

        And if you don’t want people to know you produced it, then you probably shouldn’t share it

          • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            It would be for using AI, not creating art.

            I’m just brainstorming here, but I can’t imagine how you would control AI art without some sort of regulation or licensing on the side of the AI creator…

            • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              You’re quite correct your thinking it seems unrealistic to actually detect AI generated imagery after the fact so the only fill solution would be a trusted chain of custody - it wouldn’t necessarily need a centralized authority but it would require some highly trusted issuers of trust and, unfortunately, trust in media is currently at an all time low and those companies are in the best position to serve as those issuers.

              This is a very complicated problem and we need a social (rather than a technical) solution.