Artist Jingna Zhang built Cara, a platform explicitly intended to protect artists from having their art stolen by AI…and yet these people just won’t leave them well enough alone.
“defending AI art”… jesus, that’s sad.
Imagine having so little talent that you consider AI generated slop “art”
Edit*
Yeah good luck asshole.
PSA to anyone who uploads art online, anywhere. Poison it first. Use the latest version. I’m sorry but you are in an arms race now. Dickhead over here is full of shit, but even if they’re not, Nightshade is updated fast.
Poisoning it is sadly an Arms Race, one that will inevitably be lost
And then won, and then lost, and then won. That’s how an arms race works. And we have the advantage in numbers. There are far more people who don’t want their shit scalped than people working for the morons at OpenAI, or Google or Anthropic. And yes, they ARE morons. The battle is only lost when one side gives up. You only lose when you accept defeat.
The issue is that they can just reuse the existing art once they’ve “removed” the poison that was used on it. The artworks with poison in them aren’t forever inaccessible to them, they just get them slightly later.
That doesn’t mean we should stop, but it still is a war that we ultimately can’t win. Even if the poison technology advances faster than the AI companies are, they can simply use slightly older art with a less sophisticated version of poison.
I mean, is the goal to prevent training or poison training. Yes nightshade will never prevent your work from being trained on, but hopefully models don’t know it’s poisoned and it sows model dysfunction.
An Arms Race always reaches an end, and sadly there’s more money and resources on the side of AI (but less people) than the side of anti (which has lots of people, but barely any money, and barely any resources)
It will end in defeat, but a slow gradual one at least
2 things.
-
Master locks are the easiest to pick and still the most popular. I don’t see you advocating for leaving your bike unlocked because it’s inevitable that the bike thieves win.
-
That money is fake and recirculated like the air in an airplane. That’s literally what people mean when they talk about the AI bubble. All these companies are incestuous as fuck. Google invests in Nvidia who invests in Anthropic who invests in Microsoft who invest in OpenAI who invest in Nvidia who invest in Google. There’s no NEW money coming in. That has ALREADY dried up. They’re literally passing money in a circle. That’s WHY it’s a bubble, and that’s how it’s already popping.
Personally I think we should watch Oracle. They’re by far the most over leveraged. At least publicly. When they fall over, everyone else will follow. The big ones like Microsoft and Google are at least diversified and might survive, but the bubble pop will eventually catch up. OpenAI already spend $1.22 for ever $1 they make, and their expenses grow in lock step with their demand. Sam Altman’s plan to make it all profitable is to build AGI and ask it to figure it out for him because, and I cannot stress this enough, he. is. a. moron.
Your defeatist attitude is what they want because the more people that believe that, the longer the bubble is sustained.
Take heart. They are weaker than you realise. They are not infallible, their armor is paper.
I’m drunk and apologize for my flowery language.
Happy Friday, the fight is winnable.
I love you all.
I could not agree more. I’ve been having conversations with people about this since late last year and predicted that the bubble would burst some time in 2026 but I’m thinking I may be off and it could be early 2027 now. This accounting nonsense makes up a very significant portion of the US stock market, so the bubble bursting is gonna have some pretty big flow-on effects as well. I’d recommend anyone with any form of investment look into what they have and plan for a significant market event.
You are delusional to think next year is gonna be curtains for a trillion dollar industry backed by billionaire CEOs, military and government influence. The AI bubble won’t pop, if it ever does, until well into beyond the next decade.
-
Which is why I take a completely different direction. I poison my artwork I post online through the one technique they can’t account for.
See, I’m not super great at drawing, and in order to protect their precious models, they’d literally have to go take a look and say “yeah, that drawing wasn’t very good”. They can’t detect that automatically yet!
/sorry for a very predictable joke btw
And AI bros think they’re okay. Fucking disgusting.
It’s amazing how disrespectful these idiots can be. They’ll destroy and steal people’s work, feed it to Big Corpo™ Slopinator 4.7, get shit-tier content in return, just because they chugged the kool-aid that this tech with billions of dubious investments is the future of everything.
Recently I’ve been embedding metadata into pictures I upload which include the cost to license out the image for AI training: 1 million dollars. Then, if an AI company scrapes my picture, I can take that company to court and have a concrete dollar amount for how much that company owes me for damages.
Its a bit delusional to think you can sue them. For a number of reasons, not least of which is that you don’t have the funds for a protracted legal battle and that the burden of proof that your work was used is pretty much impossible to prove.
I don’t think so. First of all, if a lawyer thinks that I have a strong case, they could agree to be paid after I win, so I don’t need to pay out of pocket up front. Second, it is easy to prove that an AI company used my pictures, since they would need to download the pictures to train on them. Alternatively, if a platform sells it to the AI company, there is a record that it was sold for the purposes of AI training.(In that case, we don’t have to prove that the image was used for training, since the crime is the sale.) Lastly, since the license and purchase info is contained within the metadata of the picture, they can’t argue that the license was unavailable or something. They have it right there in their servers!
Second, it is easy to prove that an AI company used my pictures, since they would need to download the pictures to train on them.
The problem is the AI isn’t going to use exactly the original image it will take parts of it and use it to create a new image that does not include the metadata. Just proving they downloaded it wouldn’t be actionable since they would need to download the image to get your metadata which contains the terms. You would need to prove that they applied the transferred the data to the training algorithm which would be an internal process.
Also there’s the concept of consideration to… uh… consider. Is a million dollars reasonable consideration?
But that being said, it’s worth a shot. Worst case is you get nothing, but you’d get nothing if you didn’t put licensing terms in the metadata anyway. Just seems very unlikely you’ll get a million dollars by doing this.
I’m not a lawyer, but as an artist, bravo. You’ve changed how I look at this. No sarcasm here. 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
Going out of their way to disseminate creators’ art in the specific way they have asked not to, then to go and gloat about it is peak disrespectful jerk behaviour, and seems commonplace among the pro-AI crowd.
To give an analogy, if someone cooked a noodle dish, shared it with the public and asked people to use a fork or chopsticks, it would be one thing for you to take some home and eat it with your hands on your own. Weird but whatever. But to go and post online about them eating with their hands or another way, mocking the wishes of the creator for any reason other than disability accommodation, that’s not illegal but it is hella disrespectful and hurtful.
Cunt
Tbh, that was bound to happen. At least the author is stupid enough to come forward and get in the prime spot for cyber bullying
Gross
-
Antagonises people who want to stay away from AI
-
Cries when people hate AI
Such a cognitive dissonance
There has to be a word for people, who when they hear someone hates X, but they personally like the X, so they decide to do the X even harder out of spite or as a defiance.
Toddlers, Republicans, Mentally Challenged, Idiots… Lots of words take your pick
-
These are the most deeply insecure people
Cara uses third-party content moderation services from Hive (an AI company) to prevent AI-generated art from being uploaded onto the site.
Hahahahaha so this friendly™ Chinese platform basically feeds every uploaded image into an AI to determine if it’s AI.
Just self host your own personal blog/art or use a proper website and not that shitshow.
The idea I believe it to prevent your art from being scraped. Self-hosting Isn’t a solution
The problem is that you presumably want end users to see it, which means a remote machine must be able to download it, which means it inherently must be scrapable (since that’s just downloading and preserving it). You can make it take longer or be more annoying to accomplish, but you can’t actually truly stop it and keep the site usable.
Kind of like how the problem with DRM for video is that the end user can eventually watch it, which means barring all else you can at least point a camera at the screen to produce a copy.
Honestly tho, fuck all IP copyright bullshit. It’s all based on western hegemonical laws meant to oppress the poor.
I quite of second this. People often seem to forget the fact that everything we post to the Internet, unless it got some sort of password-lock or GPG/PGP/E2EE encryption, should be considered as already exposed or something…
And, hell, even with encryption, the recipient risks leaking it once they open it. Screenshot-lock? The recipient can take a photo of the screen with a second device, or use analog HDMI splitters (akin to how movie streams are pirated) to capture the thing digitally. Poisoning the well? The recipient can apply heavy photoshopping to it until the subpixel elements are rendered meaningless, or they can even rotoscope on top of the art before feeding it to VLMs (I highly doubt Nightshade and similar algorithms would be able to poison traced-over derivatives). File metadata and things such as alternative NTFS streams? Doesn’t last long after being uploaded to a back-end, the most of which will likely strip it all for privacy/security reasons (e.g. because EXIF can sometimes carry geolocation data, so platforms may end up stripping EXIF altogether). Paywall? Nothing technically stops a buyer from uploading it somewhere else.
The only thing that could theoretically protect it after the publishing is the usage of licenses (e.g. Creative Commons, or All Rights Reserved), but, in practice, we know the only ones who could truly afford enforcing their licensing terms are those who can afford a legion of lawyers, namely studios such as Nintendo and Disney. We, amateur artists, we are neither a Nintendo nor a Disney.
And I say this as an artist myself. I once made a 3D model of an owl in Blender, fully sculpted from scratch (there’s something magical in the fact that an UV sphere can become an entire character after treating the sphere like a ball of clay to be molded) and rigged/morphable. I’m very fond of this creation of mine, I love her, she is practically sacred to me, so sacred I don’t want her to be misused. I don’t want her to become a commercial product (original or derivative), and I know even a CC-BY-NC-SA wouldn’t protect her from that because I couldn’t afford one lawyer, let alone a legion of these, to sue whoever corporation or individual dared to misuse my creation. So I leave her unpublished because, while she’s unpublished, nobody can do improper uses of her, not even AI corporations.
The moment me, as an artist, publish something online, I can’t truly expect my creation not to be misused somewhere… So everything I publish, I publish with this in mind. I don’t believe in “Intellectual Property” (bc ideas aren’t apples to become scarce), but I believe in the fact that a creation risks misuse whenever it reaches some hand other than my own.
If You put your stuff online, it is easy to steal. Otherwise people wouldn’t be able to view it.
Accept that and move on.
If you park your car outside, it is easy to steal.
Accept that and move on.
deleted by creator
If you keep your stuff in your house, it’s easy to steal. Otherwise people wouldn’t be able to break your door down.
Accept that and move on.
Nailing a 100€ note to the ground is a different kind of invitation than having a safe.
Wow I really don’t know what the downvotes are all about because your point is pretty much correct.
Real world example: If you hang up an image in a public space people can and will take pictures of it. You can’t stop this.
The whole thing has pretty much nothing to do with AI…
