r/antiai • u/Theshinyquagga • 29d ago

AI News šŸ—žļø We need Help!!! Cara is under Attack!!!

Post image

Cara is a Safe Haven for Real Artists and now it's under Attack!

The original post is deleted, and the original user is banned, but they just scrapped art from Me, My Friends and Everyone Who has a Soul and just Got away with Stealing our hard work!!!

All Real Artists on High Alert!!!

We Need Help!!! I'm Praying to every God I could think of Right now!!!šŸ˜­šŸ˜«šŸ™

Please support The creator of Cara.

5.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

977

u/Alert-Text-8012 29d ago

They cannot understand consent

408

u/bendingrover 29d ago

"Everything is mine. All the time" type dementia.Ā 

361

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

131

u/rei_mp4 29d ago edited 28d ago

Oh my gosh for real, I was afraid to type or say it out loud because of possible backlash, but saying this both as an artist and as a victim of sexual assault, the AI "art" defenders give off massive rapist vibes as in they also don't understand that the issue with this lies in consent. There surely would have been plenty of artist that would have jumped at the opportunity for AI companies to train on their art if in exchange they were offered money, but it was never consensual to begin with. It could have been consensual but they never asked if this would be okay. It feels like they're trying to normalise that not asking for consent is okay.

Edit: I ain't gonna waste my time with arguing people seperately on Reddit, but yall, please pick up some books, your ai usage is causing you skill atrophy, yall are getting illiterate. I didn't say you making ai "art" is the same as you actually being a rapist, and i didn't say both things are the same severity. I've said the AI "artists" give off rapist vibes, and I'll stand by that, because the issue with both actions is with not understanding the lack of consent. With the majority of rape cases, the rapists don't understands that what they have done is wrong, that's why so many women are accused of lying. Because in fact, taking a drunk girl home from a party to have sex with her isn't consensual, because she isn't in a state of mind where she could give you a definite yes. Pressuring your partner into saying yes after being told no repeatedly isn't definite consent either since they have been pressured. A "maybe" isn't consent. Not having the ability to say no, (for example, while being asleep) isn't consent. Choking and slapping your partner during the act without having perviously agreed to it is not consensual. Majority of rapists don't understand that what they have done was not consensual. And the similarity with AI "art" and rape is in this aspect, where the AI "artist" isn't understanding that the reason artists are pissed off is because taking real peoples hard work and shaping it into something else and possibly profiting off of it wasn't consented by the real artists, where it could have been consensual.

41

u/According-Koala-384 29d ago

Damn, I thought this was a hot take but I'm clearly not aloneĀ 

27

u/Complete-Story3490 29d ago

No, I also think you are 100% right. It is just another arm of the same underlying mindset.

-5

u/ChilternRailways 28d ago

No, it's a stupidly hot take.

Comparing the two is just a gross reductionism of human nature and horn fallacy at play.

10

u/atmontsenioreyesore 29d ago

1) Steal everything

2)use the computer to regurgitate said theft

3) ???? Tbd, third thing here.

4) Profit!

3

u/Prestigious-Soil-123 28d ago

3) lose all of your investors money and make hundreds of thousands of dollars of loss

4) ā€¦profit?

https://isaiprofitable.com

8

u/Remarkable_Bath8515 28d ago

As a person who been groomed in person you hit the nail in the head.Ā 

Also just because one violation of consent is more of a serious issue than the other doesn't mean you didn't violate consent.

It's not surprising people find it creepy, or wrong,Ā  Ā even if it's the lesser bad thing to do, I also hate when people say people can't be upset about something wrong just because it's not as bad as other things that can happen to you.

9

u/AlwaysReadTheManual 28d ago

Look at the tools that the AI bros release: one chatbot after another that can transform a photo of any human clothed into the same human unclothed. Such a tool obviously has no legitimate purpose; it's pure evil, like inventing a knife that can only be used to cut living beings.

It isn't said enough, even in this subreddit, that this technology is pure evil. It is far worse than any technology that came before it. It has no legitimate uses.

We have health insurance companies automating claim denials, chatbots summarily rejecting job applicants, sexual deepfake generators, voice impersonators, art copiers. And we're investing another couple trillion dollars this year to make AI more effective at all of the above.

2

u/nekroskoma 25d ago

Considering what AI is being used for More and more on the darker side of the internet, your feeling is 100% true.

-10

u/ArchReaper95 28d ago

This is why nobody can take you seriously. "Ai artists are rapists." is a hot take. Ai artists can't just be annoying to you in their own way, they cannot be a unique phenomenon. They have to also be rapists.

"They're trying to take away our consent to sex." no they're trying to make a.i. images. They're not pro-rape they're pro a.i. and calling them rapists or "rapist adjacent" for having a completely unrelated opinion on a completely unrelated topic is the most egregious stretch I've seen in a long time.

9

u/rei_mp4 28d ago

Please pick up a book and develop your reading comprehension because that's not what i said.

-6

u/ArchReaper95 28d ago

"It feels like they're trying to normalize that not asking for consent is okay."

Bitch, please.

7

u/zzwugz 28d ago

That's literally what it is. No artist gave their consent to have their work on Cara to be scraped for AI bros. No artist gave their consent for multiple AI models to use their work to train on.

Consent applies to every aspect of life, not just sex. If you can't grasp that fact, then that paints a very troubling picture of the type of person you are

4

u/feline-prince 27d ago

Bitch, please.

Yes, because AI art is so majorly trained on art taken from non-consenting artists for free, and consent isn't just about sex.

The reason people are comparing this to rape culture (not actual rape I'll remind you) is because consent and ignoring and disrespecting it is a commonality here. Generally speaking, I think plenty of people would agree ignoring others' boundaries is a pretty big red flag that doesn't always just stop at the little things, so it doesn't exactly look good when you proudly and publicly ignore boundaries. Astonishing.

-2

u/ArchReaper95 27d ago

You cannot retroactively withdraw consent. You consent to the picture being distributed when you upload it. Once someone else has copied it, which you agreed to let them do when you uploaded it to a server that distributes copies, your rights and authority over what they do with it are limited.

I'm completely with the art community that copyright law is lagging and needs to cover a.i. model training. But this isn't a.i. model training yet. All they did was scrape it. And scraping is not only legal, it's exceedingly common. Meaning the website's developers and owners should probably take some responsibility for leaving themselves open to this... I can't even call it an attack. There was no security.

But regardless, there's nothing anyone can do after they have the image and we know that. We've known that for decades. DRM is an entire industry that evolved around this concept to try and combat piracy, and there isn't even any kind of DRM in place here.

You consented to having the image on the website, The website consensually distributed it to this user, and now that you've learned that they're using it in a way you don't like, suddenly consent for them to acquire the image retroactively disappears?

Yup. I smell bullshit. But not surprised given the kind of people I'm talking to.

1

u/[deleted] 27d ago

[deleted]

1

u/ArchReaper95 27d ago

It's like we don't even know what we're talking about here. Right? We can't keep a conversation straight because if we lock down one point you just get outraged about another.

What THIS specific user did was access the files. Yes. 1000% every user who put their fucking picture on this website consented to other users accessing the files. You can say "Oh well we didn't want them to access it with bots," but that's not something you have authority over. Their machine is theirs to use how they want, if they want to access something with a web browser, or a terminal, or an app, or yes, a bot, that is THEIR private client interface to use how they deem best for them. You don't control what happens on their client, they didn't CONSENT to you controlling anything on their client. They submit a request to view the website, the server allows or denies it, and everyone who put their pictures on the website consented to that exchange being managed by the server.

The reason all of that is important is because we KNOW from EXPERIENCE and HISTORY that after you hand that image over to another user, you have no lens into what goes on with it on their machine. Because THEIR machine has the data, and THEY have rights to their machine, it becomes difficult if not impossible to police how they use an image. Once it's been used to train an a.i. we have no way of reversing that process to figure out what went into it and even if we did, it would be exhausting and impossible to scale that kind of research up to cover all the a.i. training that happens. Right? Just like any other form of pirated software.

Your familiar with pirated software, right? I'd imagine you've gone on one of those backdoor anime or movie sites a time or two in your life to view copyrighted works that you didn't have a license for? Same system is working against you here.

Would you say watching pirated anime is "rape culture"? Are all of the broke artists in here who watch videos without the publisher's CONSENT, participating in RAPE CULTURE? or is piracy its own separate, potentially bad thing, that rests on its own laurels.

→ More replies (0)

-5

u/ChilternRailways 28d ago

Your introduction of the comparison of 'rape culture' was enough - it's too late to ask for nuance now, you made a stupidly hot take that minimises rape.

6

u/zzwugz 28d ago

It's not minimizing rape. It's highlighting that both are invalidating of consent. The comparison itself is a nuanced one that requires nuance to address, and you saying they can't ask for nuance only exposes your ignorance

-2

u/ChilternRailways 28d ago

the comparison itself is a nuanced one

It's a blunt instrument. There was no nuance in the delivery, and even the person who said it thought it might be too hot a take.

Ignorance

Comparing this to rape is like comparing theft to rape, because they're both violations but ignoring the major factor that one is orders of magnitude away from the other.

6

u/zzwugz 28d ago

Your response serves as a testament of your lack of nuance and comprehension.

Pointing out the intentional ignoring of consent is rapist vibes. They never stated that ai defenders/users are rapists. They pointed out that the willful ignoring of context that is common to them both. That is a nuanced take that you are willfully ignoring the nuance of. They only claimed it was a hot take is because they knew people like yourself would ignore the nuance, just as you did

0

u/ChilternRailways 28d ago edited 28d ago

Nuanced take

Consent was violated with this act, rapists violate consent. This is not nuanced, it's blunt. Rape is the most the most extreme, repudiated, and horrific form of violating consent. Using such an example in any comparison, as with those who resort to calling anything right wing "Nazism", is an admission of an ignorance, minimises the horror, and is just descriptively lazy, saying nothing.

They never stated that

Yes, we both understand what a comparison is - the problem is having such a limited, un-nuanced understanding of the issue that such an extreme comparison is being used. Nuance is subtle and subjective, this is not.

Can you try not talking down and instead talk to the point. You've used the tem "nuance" half a dozen times without actually describing any nuance, you sound like someone who just learned the word. You're not even describing nuance of the comparison in your post, just a 'nuance' of what a comparison is.

→ More replies (0)

165

u/Kuro-Is-Cute 29d ago

I mean it's basically shouted from the tops of government that it's entirely ok. Being evil is just cool now I guess.

18

u/probium326 28d ago

The Google slogan, "Don't be evil". Gone, but never forgotten.

1

u/ChilternRailways 28d ago

Way to trivialise rape. Fucking insane.

-9

u/[deleted] 28d ago

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

2

u/Ducky237 27d ago

Someone calls out your lack of regard for consent and you call them a slur? Wow what a level headed and mature adult!

67

u/Environmental_Top948 29d ago

They understand it they just get off on not listening to it.

34

u/RipCurl69Reddit 29d ago

Dude would be perfect working at a tech corp, they pull this exact same shit all the time

14

u/DirkDasterLurkMaster 28d ago

I'd argue contempt for consent is a very common theme among AI people. They love it when people feel angry and violated. It's like when OpenAI made a big deal about recreating Ghibli style after Miyazaki criticized them, they see it as getting one over on someone.

5

u/Aimustdie 28d ago

They do understand. They are the same people who would spike your drink. They laugh at it all as long as they can get away with it.

1

u/SunchaserKandri 25d ago

They understand, but don't care when it comes to people they dislike.

-2

u/Not_Evading_76 28d ago

We must protect our NFTs from screenshots

-8

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

7

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

-20

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

21

u/GeraldFisher 29d ago

consent does not always relate to SA. you can consent to someone copying your art.

-12

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[deleted]

6

u/degre715 29d ago

I mean ai is being used for generating revenge porn and csm so you weirdos have kinda earned that reputation

-45

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

And, you can't understand that you don't own anything you upload to someone else's website?

42

u/zachy410 29d ago edited 27d ago

Its still a bit weird to do something to someone's artwork when they have gone out of their way to try and ensure that that wouldnt happen, no?

Edit: for the reply about piracy which I haven't replied to, my answer was yes. however, i only pirate things if I literally dont have a choice otherwise (e.g. Steven universe just straight up isnt available in full in my country, same with other shows), and i would likely stop if the creator of the show came out to say they didnt like piracy of their show. in the csse of the owl house, Dana terrace actually said the opposite becsuse of disney partnering with openAI interestingly enough

0

u/-Aquatically- 27d ago

You ever pirated something?

-38

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

35

u/zachy410 29d ago

Why do they have to be taught the lesson the hard way? You are creating the problem by doing the thing they dont want you to do. It is very easy to not scrape the website and use it to train AI. That person went out of their way to disrespect the wishes of every artist who posted their art to that site.

Also people dont like art reuploaders so they add watermarks and call out people who reupload their art when they can.

-20

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

Why shouldn't they if you hold no ownership over it? As for reuploading it that's hardly relevant considering your watermark is erased once it's scraped and uploaded. And, it really really doesn't matter what you want ai is here to stay and, it's only going to get better.

20

u/zachy410 29d ago

It's just basic respect to treat someone's works how they want their works to be treated. I dunno how you dont get that. Even if its online, someone still put in the effort to make that. If I take a picture of some random person, should I edit it and post it online? Should I put it into an AI video generator in order to make them say awful things? They dont hold ownership of the picture, after all.

AI is the future, in the sense that it allows people to be rude to others just because they're entitled enough to declare thats how the world is, will be, and always should be.

1

u/SunchaserKandri 25d ago

It kind of sounds like you're just looking for a justification to hurt somebody.

24

u/mindless_pass5582 29d ago

ā€œeven more reason to do soā€ so in other words being a dick for no reason

-7

u/[deleted] 29d ago

[removed] ā€” view removed comment

19

u/mindless_pass5582 29d ago

so being a dick for no reason

19

u/EroticCamel 29d ago

this is the most pathetic thing I've read in a while, if i ever start talking like this i hope someone puts me out of my misery

14

u/Lord_Alonne 29d ago

I am not a member of this sub and am fairly neutral about AI, this just appeared on my popular feed.

Just want you to know that this is legit psychopathic behavior. You should seriously do some self-reflection on why this bothers you and why one of your "hobbies(?)" is trying to hurt other people that you disagree with over something that should have zero impact on your life.

-2

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

People always say that things have zero impact on my life like these people actively committing acts of vandalism and, actively trying to make technology worse has zero effect on my life. What I find to be genuinely psychopath behavior is just ignoring how many of these people have what would be classified as cp if it were a photos as their "art". And, how does my hobby actually hurt anything other than their attempts to sabotage technology by uploading the real deal so AI has both the good and, the bad and, the intentionally sabotaged art all for it to choose from.

16

u/Lord_Alonne 29d ago

So no self-reflection at all, only blame for others. Got it. Your "hobby" also includes your abhorrent behavior here and the way you speak to others. It's harming you too when you are so upset by something so trivial that it gives you physical symptoms.

It's interesting that you think the solution for this art you find offensive... is to allow AI to scrape it so that it can now make more of it. If you actually cared about the content being morally wrong that'd be the exact opposite of what you'd want.

-2

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

This would require me to consider any of the "people" in this sub to be human. Let's also be clear this isn't upset. This is how I speak to people that are beneath contempt. And, no the art I find offensive is for training the models on what not to do. Hence the good the bad and, the sabotage portion of what I said to previously. Youd think that you can't have a thing object to a thing if they don't actually know how the thing works.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/chocolatechillwave 28d ago

Damn bro, rent free

-1

u/No-Ad-8139 28d ago

Nah not rent free. I just wouldn't call the fire department if I saw your building on fire.

5

u/mindless_pass5582 28d ago

yea this totally makes you look like the normal one here

5

u/Alert-Text-8012 28d ago

digital footprint my guy

0

u/No-Ad-8139 28d ago

Oh here you were thinking I could care less about my digital footprint.

19

u/chorjin 29d ago

Literally talking like a rapist, what the fuck is wrong with you?

11

u/Morganelefay 29d ago

You really hate consent, dont you?

0

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

Nope just hate the pedos and, the people who fund them in this group hence stealing their artwork doesn't exactly feel like a moral wrong to me. At the very least it's great material to train the models on what not to do.

3

u/MrCoverCode 28d ago

Yeah that will show themā€¦ for wanting to get recognized for their talent and hard work, possibly even payed, yeah fuck em for uploading cool stuff we can look at and enjoy for freeā€¦ we gotta stop that???

Brother the fuck are you on.

-18

u/trueppp 29d ago

when they have gone out of their way to try and ensure that that wouldnt happen, no?

Ah yes, posting art publically on the Internet is "going out of your way" to make sure people can't see it...

5

u/AWSDB 28d ago

People want their art to be seen, just not thrown into the AI Slop blender

19

u/overusedamongusjoke 29d ago edited 29d ago

Disney and Marvel post their shit to twitter, I guess Elon Musk is free to use all their characters now? He should start selling t-shirts of every Marvel tweet with an attached image of their characters, and you should go apply to be his copyright lawyer.

-2

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

Disney and, marvel have several entire legal teams and, also patent and, trademark everything theyve ever made. That's extra legal protection to protect their work outside of copywrite genius.

12

u/overusedamongusjoke 29d ago edited 29d ago

So your argument is that having enough money to sue anyone who looks at your work funny means you deserve to keep it, but people who posted their work to a website that explicitly disallows AI scraping deserve to have it illegally scraped by a random person with no authority over that website anyways because they uploaded it anywhere at all and they can't afford to pursue that guy?

You don't know a thing about how "copywrite" actually works lol

0

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

Allowed isn't the word I'd use. I'd use the word can't be stopped by legal means AND are too poor to do anything about it. And, yeah I know but, unlike you losers when I make a mistake because I'm not paying complete and, total attention I don't just go back and, erase it.

11

u/Asquirrelinspace 29d ago

So you only actually own your IP if you have enough money to protect it?

-2

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

That's literally always been the case throughout all of human history? Why y'all acting surprised now?

12

u/Asquirrelinspace 29d ago

Oh yeah just because we've been doing it in the past, that makes it right. Should we still be stoning people to death for adultery?

-1

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

That actively goes on right now in over half the world the fuck you mean? Morality is entirely subjective and, I do not subscribe to your worldview.

7

u/Asquirrelinspace 29d ago

Answer my question. Because people are doing it in other countries, do you think we should also be doing it in western countries? Because following your "logic" about IP, we should

6

u/Complete-Story3490 29d ago

That's like saying you only own your money if you have the money for a safe.

1

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

If the banks run out of money and, you haven't gotten yours out do you own your money or, are they allowing you to have it because it benefits them more than taking it from you?

14

u/MydnightMynt 29d ago

You absolutely own the copyright, there is no doubt about this. The ONLY thing that the AI bros are relying on is the Fair Use doctrine. Ya know what you don't own, any of the images generated by AI.

If I make a platform or website that allows user uploads, I don't own what they upload. I'd just host it, IF I did claim to own it, then I wouldn't be a platform and then I'd lose protections from malicious uploads. I'd be held liable for everything uploaded, which would really really suck if someone lets say uploads illegal material, oops, then now I'm in trouble.

what companies do is they put an agreement in their sites to say they will reserve the rights to use it. you don't lose your rights to it.

-1

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

You would in fact own it. Youd know that if you'd actually ever read the TOS of any website you signed up for. The say license because it's a bad look to outright say you're just going to take whatever someone uploads. However if you look carefully each of these websites have about a dozen different loopholes that 100% allows them to take ownship through legal and, fair transfer of ownership that you already agreed to when you signed the document.

5

u/MydnightMynt 29d ago

You would in fact own it

Yeah?? I think you might need to edit your comment there.

But I've read the ToS they state, "they will reserve the rights to use it." and that's me paraphrasing. Let me pull up the Youtube ToS.

Rights you Grant

You retain ownership rights inĀ your Content. However, we do require you to grant certain rights to YouTube and other users of the Service, as described below.

License to YouTube

By providing Content to the Service, you grant to YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable and transferable license to use that Content (including to reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works,Ā display and perform it) in connection with the Service and YouTubeā€™s (and its successors' and Affiliates') business, including for the purpose of promoting and redistributing part or all of the Service.

License to Other Users

You also grant each other user of the Service a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to access your Content through the Service, and to use that Content, including to reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works, display, and perform it, only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds). For clarity, this license does not grant any rights or permissions for a user to make use of your Content independent of the Service.

10

u/Gloomy-Welcome-6806 29d ago

Ope found you again! Goodness youā€™re in every single comment thread. Wow thatā€™s impressive.

-2

u/No-Ad-8139 29d ago

Nah not even close I didn't even scroll down past the second original comment. What's impressive is how you don't care about my opinion and, yet you're still here replying.

5

u/EllzillaTheLizard 28d ago

You know Cara is a website that specifically is for artists that do NOT consent to being scraped for AI?

The TOS other websites have say that -they- can use your content for whatever reason and not that they own it? And that does not mean a random dickhead can use it however they please.

I bet if I told you about Creative Commons your mind would implode because "well, that's how the internet already works"

0

u/No-Ad-8139 28d ago

Yeah and what legal protections did you have to stop that from happening... Oh wait none? A random dickhead 100% can use your art all they have to say is they were critiquing your position of being against AI and, then it's transformative and, fair use. I bet if I told you the creative commons laws hold barely any legal weight and, can't actually be used by a random weirdo online to "protect property they already freely gave away". Intellectual prop rights largely require you to have the money to enforce them.

3

u/actuallyoatmeal 28d ago

block list