Jean-Luc Pickguard Posted yesterday at 22:16 Posted yesterday at 22:16 (edited) You can now upload a photo to Chat GPT and pompt it to generate an image based on that image including adding musical instruments and specifying the person in the image to be shown as a puppet. eg I uploaded a headshot and entered the prompt: Quote Please produce a picture of the person in the photo attached as a puppet playing a black four string rickenbacker 4003 bass guitar with a white pickguard. So let's see your you as a muppet. Here's mine Edited yesterday at 22:17 by Jean-Luc Pickguard 5 1 Quote
Burns-bass Posted yesterday at 22:28 Posted yesterday at 22:28 This stuff is all good fun but we’re ripping off the intellectual property of huge numbers of people doing this. ChatGPT aren’t paying to license this. Neither did they pay Studio Ghib for the manga stuff and a near limitless number of other things they’ve stolen. It’s fun and a I enjoy seeing the results, but ultimately, it’s theft, however the AI guys want to dress it up. 14 1 Quote
Buddster Posted yesterday at 22:36 Posted yesterday at 22:36 Oh my lordy, whay have you started! I'm sure I dont look that old... Quote
Bolo Posted 23 hours ago Posted 23 hours ago Besides the IP theft each query takes a tonne of energy to process. Like a Cummins diesel rolling coal compared to a lean euro6 for a regular search engine query. 3 1 Quote
Paul S Posted 15 hours ago Posted 15 hours ago 8 hours ago, Buddster said: Oh my lordy, whay have you started! I'm sure I dont look that old... Where did the teacup full of dry catfood come into it? 2 4 Quote
Downunderwonder Posted 15 hours ago Posted 15 hours ago 9 minutes ago, Paul S said: Where did the teacup full of dry catfood come into it? It's a cup of coffee [beans]. Nobody ever accused AI of being smart. 1 1 Quote
ezbass Posted 11 hours ago Posted 11 hours ago 3 hours ago, Paul S said: Where did the teacup full of dry catfood come into it? That was exactly my reaction. Quote
prowla Posted 11 hours ago Posted 11 hours ago 12 hours ago, Burns-bass said: This stuff is all good fun but we’re ripping off the intellectual property of huge numbers of people doing this. ChatGPT aren’t paying to license this. Neither did they pay Studio Ghib for the manga stuff and a near limitless number of other things they’ve stolen. It’s fun and a I enjoy seeing the results, but ultimately, it’s theft, however the AI guys want to dress it up. Why is it theft - are the products/services being used subject to licence fees? (I don't know, just asking...) Quote
Buddster Posted 11 hours ago Posted 11 hours ago 3 hours ago, Paul S said: Where did the teacup full of dry catfood come into it? I didn't actually specify to add coffee/cat food, but in my profile I've added coffee as a like, so I guess AI went off script and added a cup of cat food. 1 Quote
Dad3353 Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago 31 minutes ago, prowla said: Why is it theft - are the products/services being used subject to licence fees? (I don't know, just asking...) The term 'Muppet' is owned by Disney and/or Henson, and anything that resembles any Muppet character could be subject to litigation. 2 Quote
itu Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago 13 hours ago, Buddster said: Oh my lordy, whay have you started! I'm sure I dont look that old... Four... and three strings? Quote
prowla Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago Just now, Dad3353 said: The term 'Muppet' is owned by Disney and/or Henson, and anything that resembles any Muppet character could be subject to litigation. Ah - the word muppet (I was thinking about the tech)... I hadn't realised it was that old, but the term, "marionette" + "puppet", was first used by Jim Henson in 1955. The point does bring up an interesting question, though: if the developers of the system don't code in the word "muppet" and the request is to "draw me like a puppet", where is the infringement? Quote
Dad3353 Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago Just now, prowla said: Ah - the word muppet (I was thinking about the tech)... I hadn't realised it was that old, but the term, "marionette" + "puppet", was first used by Jim Henson in 1955. The point does bring up an interesting question, though: if the developers of the system don't code in the word "muppet" and the request is to "draw me like a puppet", where is the infringement? If there was a demonstratable likeness to any Muppet character, one would have to argue one's case against a battery of highfaluting Disney lawyers with deep pockets. Whether one wins or not could be independent of the rights or wrongs of the case, just the finances engaged. Such is Justice in these realms. 1 Quote
Dood Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago That’s actually very good. cGPT has managed to recreate my video review set in pretty incredible detail, not to mention the great big muppet sat front and centre. 1 Quote
LukeFRC Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago 1 hour ago, prowla said: Why is it theft - are the products/services being used subject to licence fees? (I don't know, just asking...) AI isn’t smart, it just copies existing things - and the image libraries they are copying (like a regular google image search) mostly have copywrite held by someone else. Either a company or artist (imagine an image of Daffy Duck or David Hockney image) or owned by someone else (my holiday snaps of my kids meeting Daffy Duck at Disneyland or Tate gallery’s photo of a Hockney image) so while AI could make me look like Daffy Duck in a hockney photo - it has no right to the images it’s training itself on. which isn’t good. 2 Quote
Burns-bass Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago Just now, LukeFRC said: AI isn’t smart, it just copies existing things - and the image libraries they are copying (like a regular google image search) mostly have copywrite held by someone else. Either a company or artist (imagine an image of Daffy Duck or David Hockney image) or owned by someone else (my holiday snaps of my kids meeting Daffy Duck at Disneyland or Tate gallery’s photo of a Hockney image) so while AI could make me look like Daffy Duck in a hockney photo - it has no right to the images it’s training itself on. which isn’t good. It’s not just images. It’s hoovering up all the content on the internet, including written content, music and images and regurgitating it. Plagiarism is, or should be, a moral outrage. We, as a society, are giving access of valuable material for free to tech companies who will then charge us to buy it back, repackaged and recontextualised. Mind you, this is the country where people will happily share their DNA with a company if they get some report that says they’re somehow related to a king etc. Anyone involved in the creative industries should hate and fear what AI is doing today - and could do in the future. 3 Quote
ezbass Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago Why is it that AI can't count? So many generated images miss off tuners. Quote
Doctor J Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago AI Jaco only needed three strings, that's why. 2 3 Quote
prowla Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago I have to say I was impressed with an AI item for the first time last week. I was documenting an IT infrastructure architecture using a tool called Notion. I'd written the text and wanted to add a diagram but couldn't find how to start the diagramming widgetry. I was looking around for help and it said to press spacebar for ai. So I pressed spacebar and typed "draw architecture diagram", expecting some generic boxes and lines to appear. But no, it drew my diagram, including three scenarios I'd written into the text. It had depicted the layers top-down, whereas I wanted them bottom-up, but otherwise it was spot-on. (I think my very structured descriptions had enabled it to infer the componentry.) OTOH, I have a colleague who is using ChatGPT to help him write Bash scripts; mostly they're OK, if a bit quirky sometimes. Well, there was one which wasn't working and it took us a while to figure out what it was doing, but it was still erroring. After a bit of reading of man pages, comparing Mac vs. Linux I spotted the issue: it was supplying an empty string "" in the place of an optional arg. Deleting that fixed it. So, it got a prototype in place, but (a) complicated the issue and (b) had a syntax error. Summary: AI can be good and impressive, but you always have to keep your eye on it and not blindly accept its outputs as verbatim. 1 Quote
TimR Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago (edited) 21 minutes ago, Burns-bass said: Plagiarism is, or should be, a moral outrage. Simply copying and regurgitating wholesale and passing off as your own, yes. Part of what 'intelligence' is, is the ability to learn by copying. At the moment, that's the only element of 'inteligence' in Artificial Intelligence. Edited 9 hours ago by TimR Quote
Jean-Luc Pickguard Posted 9 hours ago Author Posted 9 hours ago How about starting a separate thread for the ethics of AI and keeping this one for the silly pics of BCers as puppets? 4 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.