'An Insult To Life Itself': Hayao Miyazaki’s AI Criticism Resurfaces As OpenAI’s Ghibli-Style Image Trend Takes Over Social Media
'An Insult To Life Itself': Hayao Miyazaki’s AI Criticism Resurfaces As OpenAI’s Ghibli-Style Image Trend Takes Over Social Media - Animehunch
So was it trained on his work without his approval?
That should be the headline. Assuming it was done without consent, which lets face it, it most likely was.
Edit: It came to my attention that Japan has a more open stance to AI training on copyright materials. It does however say that
Accordingly, the focus is that ingestion of copyrighted material is prohibited if the intention is to output products that can be perceived as creative expressions of copyrighted works, including mimicking the style of specific creators.
Not a laywer but all these memes created by the ChatGPT look like creative expressions that mimic the style.
Read more here
Like all other AI and all the copyright in the world. Shareholders are ok with. Copyright for me, not for you. Pirates were the bad guys. These are the saviours we deserve.
If you listen to the red hot chili peppers or watch a marvel movie or look at a DC comic and then go and make a song, movie, or painting inspired by the style of a certain creator that does not mean you have somehow violated those creators copyright. You don't owe them any money because you took inspiration.
AI training on publicly available data does not infringe on copyright even if that data is somehow copyrighted.
And I know that many people on these kinds of platforms don't like to hear this but the benefits of AI outweighs any potential legal issues copyright might entail.
Moreover, and I keep pointing this out over and over, you can't have the same information free for individuals to use and have it paid for at the same time for corporations. You have to decide if you want that information free for all or for none.
Edit: yes yes. I know y'all don't like these facts and yet they're undisputed.
Seems this is legal now. Keep this in mind, when the next video game decompilation project comes along because that's also machine-generated material based on copyrighted released media. That must be equally as legal now.
Everything was. Is ...
Miyazaki is my favorite angry old man.
Life is hard when you dreamed of being a chèf but got popular with animation.
Yeah it sucks for him to have ended up creating works beloved by hundreds of millions and touched and changed lives
he could have made some steaks and shit but oh well
Relatable. I'll never achieve my dreams either.
he's a shitty father though.
The funny thing is OpenAI's image generator didn't really do a good job with making a Ghibli stylized version of Altman.
That being said, there will be a downstream impact on media quality if there is no novel approach to balancing creative work and AI slop generators. Don't think there is a simple answer.
Replacing amazing creative humans with bland AI generated content is not a good use of AI.
Ironic since the decrease of human made work (art or software) will decrease the quality or diversity of generative AI itself
Mostly true, but...
Replacing clip art, generic filler from Getty images, and other hand-crafted slop with machine-made slop for things like slideshows, YouTube thumbnails, and other applications where the image isn't meant to convey something actually existing from the primary content, that I think is fine.
Of course it should be based on free software (such as AGPL) and use only freely provided or public domain inputs.
Of course it shouldn't be used to misrepresent its outputs as produced by, authorized, or of people that it is not.
But what we have right now is an another sort of enclosure of the cultural commons, blended with plagerism-by-another-name. If there are already terms for this sort of misappropriation, I can't think of them right now.
It’s a good use for me. I work with children and the things I’ve “created” have been significantly better thanks to mid-journey.
Before that it was just generic clip art, now I can make really beautifully themed stuff that was both out of my skill range and price range.
The artists, would never get money from me since I’m not rich enough to afford it but the children benefit.
Next you're going to tell me using someones artstyle to depict someone getting deported is not appropriate for the white house twitter
While I agree that it's not appropriate, that woman was a drug dealer who returned illegally into the USA - I will shed no tear for her.
She's a human being that deserves a fair trial.
There'd be no need for drug dealers if drugs were decriminalized, like in other progressive Nations.
This isn't about her, specifically.
This is about the utter lack of humanity it illustrates.
The White House officially makes fun of her suffering.
She is still a human beeing that deserves not to be made fun of like this.
Still less criminal than the admistration so very shaky ground for this claim.
All current drug problens themselves were created by republicans who they invented the drug war in the 70s intentionally to curtail free speech of Vietnam war protesters.
The drug over criminalization created the environement that directly leads to fentanyl being an optimal border crossing narcotic.
Drug dealers are more respectable right now than all administration members combined, even the "illegal" ones.
All very dubious for the most powerful country in the world, which rapes the entire planet for mineral ressources to call any human "illegal".
I speak for all humans when I say, this planet would be a lot better without the memetic infections known as America, China, Europe, India, Russia.
Maybe if they all had a nuclear fireworks party the survivors would have the opportunity to learn not to build those monstrous egregores.
You got a link for that? I'm not finding anything online linking Rumeysa Ozturk to anything related to drugs
The bigger problem here is the loss of jobs and we are talking about a huge loss of employment that will affect economies really hard. The future looks more and more bleak.
I don't know about you, but I don't absolutely require job for my life. I do require nutrients and shelter though...
All these job people are just barking up the wrong tree. Oh no my 9-5 is gone instead of oh wow now we collectively have less work load and should focus on resource redistribution.
Uh huh, so your going to grow and hunt your own nutrients then I guess? Build your own shelter?
I guess you could do all that if you had the money to buy the required land for it, but then again if you had that kind of money you didn't need a job in the first place.
Hopefully Soylent Green comes fast to save us.
The bigger problem here is the loss of jobs and we are talking about a huge loss of employment that will affect economies really hard.
I would say that's a tangential problem. Because, you know, in theory...
But the deeper problem is ultimately in expertise as a learned skill developed over time and through practice. If you're de-skilling work, you're dismantling the tools by which we train the next generation of artists and production crews. If we were just replacing humans with machines for some route manual labor (like Pixar replaced Disney's old hand drawn animations with a newer CGI look), the result would be a new style and perhaps less tendentious from route reproductions.
But we're gutting the whole process of development which means you're losing the pool of skilled professionals who know how to create CGI (or even flip-book style 60s animation) from first principles. That means sacrificing whole fields of specialized expertise for... what? This?
"A real labor of love"
Christ. It's like people cosplaying as real artists.
That will only happen if a society completely is reorganized to get rid of money or if they introduce universal basic income (at a rate that actually allows people to live).
Realistically I can't see either of those things happening.
Reminds me of how millennials and generations onward have learned less and less maintainence skills to the point where most of us can't sow or fix shit if it's broken because we grew up in a consumer culture where you just buy a new one when the old one breaks. The quality of products have decreased too so they break quicker which gives people incentive to buy a new one instead of fixing.
My parents generation hold on to old items and they patch up their clothes and know how to fix shit around the house but they didn't teach me any of that because the culture shifted and it wasn't really needed.
We are not only losing skills and tactile learning and understanding, we are also rapidly torpedoing out planet into a massive trash heap. Which is a bit of a duh, I know, but still.
I for one have noticed the insane decline in the quality of clothes after covid. It is shockingly shitty now and tears faster than ever. Shirts and leggings I bought ten years ago still hold up while similar shirts and leggings from a few years ago already tear or unravel. It is shocking. I guess this is what will eventually happen to art too.
I've seen pretty much the same thing happening in the programming space. In another 10 years there's going to be a massive shortage of senior programmers who are capable of doing anything more complicated than the AI, and able to sort out the messes everyone's creating with it.
All the companies not wanting to hire entry level programmers right now is also a big problem for those starting now. I can only hope companies realize AI is not a replacement for a human's learning ability.
I think it's intentional. Where you had to think to do something, you'd inevitably learn to think. Where you had to put soul and wisdom and aesthetic feeling into your work, you'd inevitably touch those things for other parts of your life.
There are people higher in the society, who think lower castes shouldn't have that and will be fine with knowledge and expertise just sufficient to do their jobs.
They wouldn't be so hellbent on this particular technology, if they didn't see how relatively recent progress changed that curve of expertise for radio, electric engineering, all engineering, computer science, automobiles, home appliances, and what not. So they see this consistently works for 25+ years.
So they work to deprive us of practice that allows to do more in all those directions. There's a moat that could as well be an abyss between what we know and what we'd need to know to make relevant things. That moat wasn't there 25 years ago. The path from a novice computer user to someone knowing all DOS interrupts and what DMA and IRQ are was less than the path from a novice computer user today to making a simple GUI application.
(I've got executive dysfunction, so feel these things more, but I'm certain they are true.)
Not an AI problem though. Perhaps AI will help some people understand that there are some big ass problems in our society.
Time for TheLuigiAI.
With big asses being one of them. Obesity and it's complications are getting out of control. I'm in favor of free glp-1 clinics and then free antidote clinics for whatever terrible blight the free glp-1 clinics unleash upon us in 5-10 years.
I've never read or enjoyed any AI works so far, tbh.
This is why I still have a coal furnace to heat my house. So many people just use furnaces without thinking of the displaced economic value.
Say what you will about the soulessnes of AI imagery (I find it very dissapointing), but this new technology is going to take our jobs argument is incredibly tired boomer-speak that shows a lack of understanding of history and a lack of imagination.
As a tool, it should be highly useful to artists to help them create things. However, the fact that these algorithms (I don't care to call them AI because they aren't) are stealing people's work and then shitting out mediocre garbage and the people in the creative industry who tend to finance such things start thinking that "these machines can just do what an artist can so why pay for an artist" is the problem.
What if it allows other creative people to create newer works rather than these few people. Could spell a new Renaissance of creativity that didn't exist before. Lots of people have great stories to tell but lacked artistic ability or resources.
One of my favorite things is when people mash up two popular songs and shared it on Napster. Can't get anywhere close to that today without risking account bans on most sites. I say open the flood gates.
See this is the (well, one major) problem with copyright.
Imaginary property for me ("AI" goons), not for thee (actual artists).
Unfathomably based
Ya. These are the same people that continually try to take down Team Four Star for their satirization of DBZ because it made is actually better in many ways, from a country that has some of the worst satire and free use laws in the world.
Creators of copyrighted material in Japan can literally sue someone from making fun of their material.
Pardon me if I don't take their crocodile tears seriously.
i hate how brainwashed westerners are. will go on a diatribe about the importance of free speech and then rabidly defend copyright as if it isn’t directly contrary to the idea of freedom of information, all in the same breath.
inb4 that’s a description of every reply to this comment.
I don't see an issue.
Let's say I write a book and it starts getting popular. A big publisher notices and makes a nicer looking book that's a direct copy and runs a marketing campaign and it goes viral. It turns into a movie, video game, and has tons of merch. The publisher makes tons of money and I get nothing.
Is that really the future you want?
Copyright grants a temporary monopoly on a work, and that's a good thing because it protects people from large corporations that have much more resources than them.
The problem with copyright is that it lasts too long, not that it exists. We need to cut copyright substantially (say, 10-20 years), but not throw it out altogether.
I mean it checks, the idea of property and owning it is more important than anything else. The entire economic system is based around that. It makes sense that something that is free in action and in cost isn't welcomed in such a money driven society.
Pretty sure you don't understand the difference between copywrite and freedom of speech. But that's ok.
So pokemon has lèse-majesté protections ?
I don't understand this post properly. Miyazaki critizes an the movement animation based on an AI model, not chatgpt's ghibli stuff?
The article isn't about the new animation but about how the old clip has resurfaced and is retreading its origin and how it relates to recent events.
Now coming back to Miyazaki’s thoughts on AI, a widely shared video from 2016 shows the legendary animator reacting with disgust to an AI-generated animation demo.
The animation in the clip reminded him about his friend's disability and how the creators of the animation didn't regard ableism while making it. Later in the clip, one of the creators had expressed that they would like to create a machine that could "draw pictures as humans do" and Miyazaki was depicted as displeased after this statement.
The article doesn't go into if there were any comments from Miyazaki on the Ghibli-style image.
I thought it was John dunsworth
Suh-NAP!
While AI is boosting productivity and is amazing, it also appeals to our worst inner instincts of giving in to authority and outsourcing and taking credit for others' work.
Edit2: forgot this is the luddite thread:D
Nah AI is just garbo in general. Any productivity it gives has a noticible drop in quality and capabilities that result in net loss.
An insult to life is working 12h a day japanese style for the industry. I'm aware that they do things differently at studio ghibli but at the end of the day they are a for profit company making billions like the rest. Labeling AI as an insult to life sound like much bigotism.
Tell me you've never seen a Studio Ghibli movie without telling me you've never seen a single Studio Ghibli movie. Literally every one of them contains some "advancing technology isn't necessarily a good thing and the old ways have value" message. If AI were personified in one of their movies, it'd be a oozing black oil demon monstrosity spitting soot into the air.
It'd be like Banksy doing advertisement for Nestle. It's just so contrary to the message they put out.
A message about technology isn't the same as labeling AI as "an insult to life itself."
This guy simply sound like a bigot. His studio is going to rely on AI in any case through the software they are using. If they use photoshop they are already using AI.
Where's the "advancing technology isn't necessarily a good thing and the old ways have value" message in Kiki's Delivery Service?
Bigoted against what?? A machine? The money grubbing assholes who are using those machines to profit on other people's work without giving them a dime in compensation? Who the hell are you defending here?
Studio Ghibli and their artists put in millions of hours collectively to create works if absolute art. Sam Altman just borrowed millions of dollars to rip them off.
Bigoted against a tool that is going to change the industry and digital art, the same way computers did back in the day.
If you throw AI at your hand draw 20 frames per second you are going to get the smoothest film ever and that's just a stupid example. You can use AI for a thousand things already from the story boards to your final work.
Why not both?
Yes, only one thing can be an "insult to life". GOOD point.
I think we all agree here that japanese work ethics are shit
Do you know the context of the quote?
I don’t see mathematicians pitching a fit that lesser skilled people can use calculators to produce their results. I don’t understand the artists’ complaining that AI allows the lesser skilled people to produce an image of their ideas.
As always, the problem isn’t the tech. The problem is capitalism forcing people into competing with the tech.
I don't think you have a good handle on what mathematicians do.
Nor what artists really do
It’s a metaphor.
But also, the distinction may become irrelevant: https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-close-are-computers-to-automating-mathematical-reasoning-20200827/
I don’t see mathematicians pitching a fit that lesser skilled people can use calculators to produce their results. I don’t understand the artists’ complaining that AI allows the lesser skilled people to produce an image of their ideas.
Dumbest analogy I've seen in a minute.
But art is also one of the most fundamental things everyone learns to do. Literal children learn to do art, and doodling is something everyone knows how to do.
Although I do think that the issue is exacerbated by the enthusiast-types who will tune a model on someone's work as a form of vengeance, and smugly brag about how they can have the computer crunch out something approximating their work.
They’re not replicating children’s art. It’s complex art that takes more study to produce. Children learn math, too. Calculators still help.
