Hey there, sometimes I see people say that AI art is stealing real artists’ work, but I also saw someone say that AI doesn’t steal anything, does anyone know for sure? Also here’s a twitter thread by Marxist twitter user ‘Professional hog groomer’ talking about AI art: https://x.com/bidetmarxman/status/1905354832774324356
It’s not stealing in the same way that studying the classics in an art class isn’t stealing. We should still be critiquing it, however, on environmental grounds
The good news is that efficiency is rapidly improving, so energy use problem does look like it’s being solved. There is a lot of incentive in reducing energy costs as well which means that there is a concerted effort being applied here.
The problem is that there may continue to be increased resource demands anyway due to increased usage (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-ai-boom-could-use-a-shocking-amount-of-electricity/) Generally, yes, this may be made better but that currently is still the issue I see primarily with AI art in 2025
I mean that’s just Jevons Paradox, it’s not really AI specific problem.
Yes, but it still can be applied to AI
My point is that even if AI art was magically banned tomorrow, the energy demand isn’t going to drop as a result. Instead, we’ll just start using energy for something else. That’s a feature of how our civilization functions.
It is stealing, it’s just being done at such a scale most people cannot understand. It’s fully derived from theft and requires continuous industrial levels of bourgeois theft to function and stay relevant.
How is it stealing if the image still exists? They aren’t taking away the image in any way whatsoever therefore it isn’t stealing