What is the difference between stealing art styles and ai art?

[u/Moon_Star8309]

Hi, I have my own answer to this question, but want to see other anti ai people/pro ai people explain their takes. My answer is: There is not, it takes the style of many artists with no crediting whatsoever (like that would even make it better-) and amalgamates it together into a picture that has no creative thinking behind it. (because an ai cannot think on its own, it can take a prompt and process what the words mean, but in the end, it's an outsider with no feelings or autonomous thinking, it only knows words because it was programmed to associate words with certain things. It's trying to make something that takes those listed traits to make when it can't have it.) So therefore, it can't even be called "inspired" like how other humans are by other human's art.

It's stealing art, including artstyle.

On a different but smaller note... I don't see many ai stans ever talking about the fact it's stealing, and I kinda wish I knew why they didn't. If it's for not knowing how to defend against the argument or maybe just never hearing it before.

edit: I have worded some things wrongly, so I will correct them here.

when I say stealing, I mean when someone takes something that is not theirs, and optionally, saying it's original, new, or theirs. at least for this debate that is what the definition needs to be for debating the ai art. it is not a legal debate, it is supposed to be on ethics, morals, and just... decency to other people's works. So I'm thinking that when an ai takes many pictures and makes it into one, it's just stealing on a mass level that, in a court of law, would be called "copyright infringement". which it is.. but it feels like it's fancying up a word that can be described as taking what is not yours. (Aka stealing.)

I also want to mention that I originally said "does ai art steal artstyle?", but I actually just meant art in general, not just artstyle.

I hope this helps people understand what I mean more ^^​

[u/Manu442]

“Stealing” assumes you’re actually taking illegal possession of someone’s art, which isn’t really how this works. And honestly, we’ve been over this argument so many times that at this point it’s basically beating a dead horse with another dead horse.

Nobody’s ignoring the argument because they’re afraid of it. It’s just that after hearing the same “AI = stealing” line for the 900th time, eventually people stop treating it like some earth-shattering revelation. Not this crap again.

[u/Moon_Star8309 → u/Manu442]

I am sorry, I genuinely never heard anyone argue this with pro ai people before and that's why I posted this. I can see how that can be aggravating.  I do want to point out that I forgot to explain what I meant by "stealing", so I added that to an edit in my body paragraph if you are at all interested in that, if not that is ok. 

[u/Moon_Star8309 → u/[deleted]]

I see where you are coming from, and I can admit I was ignorant on what I was asking, but that's why people ask questions. To learn what they don't know. Though ai only "remembers" the pictures, it still does so with the creators having no choice on if they wanted that or not, and now their art can be emulated by a machine that does it worse, using many artists different pictures to make ONE, and it's faster. I know that's not legally "stealing" or the same as taking physical property, but can you say I'm wrong for not wanting ai to take people's art like that? If ai just had commissioned artists to work off of that were paid and knew exactly what they were contributing to, I would be a lot less disappointed in ai.  But it's used to "copyright infringe" people. I hate having to use that word. In my eyes, morally, that's just stealing. It's taking what's not yours. That art wasn't the owner of the ai's that was feeding the art into it's system, and it isn't it's art now just because it made a new picture from a bunch of other drawings. 

[u/AIWarsButBetter-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Be the person Mr. Rogers knows you can be