• thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    There is also the legal thing to solve too, if the generated code or art can be licensed at all (assuming it does not violate any intellectual property that exists already). Because our laws grant copyright to humans only, not to animals or machines. Does the human get the copyright to anything it prompts to generate?

    There are so many layers of issues. I agree with your reply entirely. I also thought about mentioning those few exceptions, but the reality is that most companies creating games use these paid proprietary online models, because they are probably the best.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      That just exposes how flawed the copyright system is, TBH. Licensed code (and even art) was already shakey to me, even when human made.

      It is true that most are using Claude or ChatGPT, sadly. But I think it’s because they are the “default” and popular rather than for any particular performance reason, as is the case across tech.

      • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s actually similar to how most professionals use Photoshop and can’t get away from it. There is one thing about Ai models, its like a web search engine that you can theoretically switch anytime. Because theses are just web interfaces and that’s a good thing. If ChatGPT goes crazy, people will instantly use something different.