Sorry, taking this seriously. So… if I use their tool… and enter a lurid combination of popular cartoon characters, morally indefensible fetishes, and prominent political figures… it’s their fault. They made that art. The image you closed immediately but cannot unsee, contains absolutely none of my meaning. It is immaculate of my intent, and I cannot be blamed.
No matter how many hours I spent getting Frieren’s spit to land in Starmer’s ear.
If they created the ai to be capable of producing that sort of image then yes. They curated the ai, they gave it the data that allowed it to produce that. You can’t train an ai on, as a random example, exclusively traditonal oil paints pre 2000 and have it make porn of frieren. They would have to intentionally give it that capability. Should they have given it that ability, doesn’t it say something about their intent and meaning in constructing the ai? Isn’t it purposeful on their part?
But does the JPEG have Buddha nature?
Sorry, taking this seriously. So… if I use their tool… and enter a lurid combination of popular cartoon characters, morally indefensible fetishes, and prominent political figures… it’s their fault. They made that art. The image you closed immediately but cannot unsee, contains absolutely none of my meaning. It is immaculate of my intent, and I cannot be blamed.
No matter how many hours I spent getting Frieren’s spit to land in Starmer’s ear.
If they created the ai to be capable of producing that sort of image then yes. They curated the ai, they gave it the data that allowed it to produce that. You can’t train an ai on, as a random example, exclusively traditonal oil paints pre 2000 and have it make porn of frieren. They would have to intentionally give it that capability. Should they have given it that ability, doesn’t it say something about their intent and meaning in constructing the ai? Isn’t it purposeful on their part?