Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Is AI Ruining the Creative Process? - Long Story Short | The Daily Show
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 08. 2024
- Chat-GPT is on track to make a billion dollars this year, which is great for them, but not so great for the artists whose work is being used without their credit, consent, or payment. Sarah Silverman digs into why many artists, herself included, are suing AI companies in this #LongStoryShort. #DailyShow #SarahSilverman
Subscribe to The Daily Show:
/ @thedailyshow
Follow The Daily Show:
Twitter: / thedailyshow
Facebook: / thedailyshow
Instagram: / thedailyshow
Stream full episodes of The Daily Show on Paramount+: www.paramountplus.com/?ftag=PP...
Follow Comedy Central:
Twitter: / comedycentral
Facebook: / comedycentral
Instagram: / comedycentral
Watch full episodes of The Daily Show: www.cc.com/shows/the-daily-show
About The Daily Show:
For over twenty-five years, the groundbreaking, Emmy and Peabody award-winning The Daily Show has entertained audiences each night with hilarious, provocative and insightful satire about our society that helps make sense of the world. The Daily Show redefined the late night show category on TV and, with an audience of over 44M across social media platforms, has become a launching pad for some of the biggest stars in entertainment.
This next chapter of this iconic franchise showcases its diverse news team of correspondents and contributors, including Ronny Chieng, Michael Kosta, Desi Lydic, Dulcé Sloan, Lewis Black and Jordan Klepper, comedy greats as guests hosts, and interviews with influential and emerging voices from across society.
The Daily Show airs weeknights at 11/10c on Comedy Central.
i was skeptical about silverman being host but after seeing a few segments i want her on permanently. her delivery and comedy is so perfect, she doesnt lose a beat and it never feels awkward. i never even felt like, even though he is a genius at storytelling, the format worked for trevor noah even. it works for silverman.
comedy central if you have any sense at all, you need to make her permanent.
Seriously, she's got the chops. Perfect timing, a great interviewer. I was so disappointed when her "I Love You, America" show was cancelled. She was doing great work.
I really hope they make her permanent! She definitely has the timing and delivery well done. And she has excellent character.
That's cause Trevor Noah, unlike Sarah or, say, John Oliver or Michelle Wolf, just isn't very funny.
comedy brilliance & gold... make her the full time host already!
The issue is that there are companies popping up overnight trying to sell derivative versions of material that creatives have put years of blood, sweat, and tears into. If it's being exploited commercially, artists should have the final say in their IP/NIL being used in another entity's work. If so, there needs to be a satisfactory agreement for compensation.
The legal system is struggling to keep up. And if a big case ever went to the Supreme Court, I have no idea how they will rule.
I own the phrase "blood, sweat, and tears." Pay me money.
I don't get it. AI isn't stealing or copying people's work. It just learns from their works, just like humans do. I read "the bedwetter" a few years ago. So, if I ever write a book, do I owe Sarah money, because her book might have in some shape or form influenced the result? If what the AI puts out wouldn't infringe on copyright if a human made it, there simply isn't a case.
To equate AI art to sampling (like she did in the video) is absurd and misleading. When you sample something, you literally take a recognisable piece of someone's music and put it in your own. But AI art is much more like someone studying a lot of music and then coming up with their own. Just that it's not done by a human but by a machine.
By the way, there already has been a case dismissed last week because the artists were not able to show any copyright infringement by the AI.
Unfortunately, they're going to lose in court unless it's specifically copying.
'Scraping' = 'Read'
'Stole' = 'Bought a copy'
So now every author who read another author's novel needs to give a kickback to that other author? How do you tell what portion makes up the output?
The only question is, will AI represent itself in court since it passed the bar exam?
No, you must be a natural person
Someone tried that, the lawyers rebelled and blocked it
Corporations are people now AI is people.
Well, the AI is already more qualified than Gym Jordan, so fair is fair.
Sarah Silverman's hosting of The Daily Show has been consistently some of the absolute best
Would love to see more of Sarah. She definitely fits bill of the daily show
Sarah is the daily show that fits the most. Is like watching JS female version.
Sarah is just getting better at this with a second run. ❤
So glad comedy central can be better than apple (low bar, I know), by not cancelling The Daily Show over covering AI
AI needs to be regulated and laws in place before it gets crazy. It’s not ok for peoples works or art or faces to be stolen.
But if the AI isn't using other people's work then it can't work because simply that's what AI is just stuff pumping out works and doing what it's told if you tell it to do something and it has to do it's own there'd be nothing it can do for it's a machine and everything is made by a person. It'd look at you stupidly. That's it.
Libraries and art galleries exist allowing humans to steal art and create derivative work. That is what you are talking about. The solution is clear. Ban all create works. Ban all books, and art. Those works allow brains to improve. They allow children to be educated, thus allowing them to make money purely derived from those who made the educational content.
When we are back around camp fires banging stones together you will have almost won, once you have stopped people from showing others how to bang stones together and start fires.
That is your mission. AI is just a brain simulation, so yes, that is your mission.
You called stolen art, I called intellectual property rights. If the USA and the EU want to respect those rights, wait for the chatgpt 5 coming from China
and people laughed at the president (the real one), when he sounded the alarm and wanted to legislate around AI
I think the biggest problem with AI is it's imapct on artist's motivation, I caught myself thinking multiple times "why should i even bother creating something, if you can just punch some words into a software and it spits out whatever you want in a matter of seconds" and we all know how hard it is to motivate yourself to just do it, be creative and how much of a struggle everyone in this field goes through
The creative process is not laborious, it is exciting. I can hardly imagine that artists would want to do without it. People who aren't artists will never understand this.
@@caterpillar4153your 'art' must be dull
@@KINDaf Yes, so boring that my works are stolen by big tech companies so that prompt engineers can develop their creativity.
And when I look around on the Internet, the results are impressive: beautiful women as robots, beautiful women as anime, kittens with sunglasses, kittens with hats, kittens with raincoats, wolves with sunglasses, then beautiful women with... :D :D :D
We create to express ourselves, not because it exists or what others have created. Why do people take the same photograph of the same object like the Taj Mahal or whatever? Even though way better photographs exist?
Thank you Sarah Silverman for taking on OpenAI for creatives when artists like myself don’t have the money or influence to do so ourselves. It truly means the world to me. As an artist seeing the rise of AI generators taking artists work without our consent, it is so affirming to hear you voice artists’ perspectives that are so often dismissed and diminished. You have my support
The lawsuits and compensation regulation is a start, but they would only compensate existing artists. In 50 years that won't matter, and Ai will dominate all art industries. It needs to be stopped, not regulated.
My amazing best friend is an artist, and she’s had her art stolen by actual people. She does NOT need it stolen by a robot too.
Of course she does.
@@mauimrc Why would you say something so terrible?
@@cleffa173 you mean why would I say something so daring and innovative?
@@mauimrc No. I don’t mean that. You said you WANTED my best friend’s art stolen. That is an absolutely terrible thing to say to someone you don’t even know.
@@cleffa173 🤔 I never said WANTED (all caps for some reason) that. But...if I had, wouldn't you mean it's a daring and innovative thing to say to someone I don't even know?
Can AI create a photo that makes Trump look like a human being? That would be scary.
I did it and I got swamp monster with his hair
Or Kamala
Same issue for photography too!
Photography does not rely on previous works of art without permission or compensation in its creation process.
Sarah OWNS Long Story Short. If she doesn't become the permanent host, she should get guest appearances to do this segment.
She should be host of the Daily Show. She’s perfect
@@nickpaz9113 Silverman is a hateful anti-Palestinian ethno nationalist !!!
They will more likely get a bLK person
👏👏👏 In the words of Jack Black: "I am team humanity"
Sarah should be the permanent host of the daily show if she wants it. Absolutely clear, that her talent shines in this position.
Absolutely!
As a software developer I’m really tired of people having weird takes misunderstanding the issue
… so imagine my surprise when this turned out to be really thoughtful
Did AI write this comment for you?
Just kidding....
I don’t agree with her argument. If I read a book or see a piece of art, it may inspire me to write or draw my own, but the memory of the previous artwork is still in my head. The artist doesn’t get credit for that. The only difference with ai is it’s efficiency.
@@seanknox7321 The difference is that you develop your own style instead of just remixing what you have seen or read. Unlike real artists, AI doesn't develop its own style, it can only ever copy others.
@@VinceValentineThat's not true in either regard.
@@seanknox7321 The issue is that level of high efficiency generally isn't available to humans. Fact of the matter is that when your brain have limited access to any kind of source material making the impact of it limited to your own interpretation. However, AI has full and interrupted use of any test materials used, many of which is copyrighted limiting it's commercial uses but nonetheless is still available through web scrapers.
More Sarah??? Yes please!
This is a huge issue for all REAL artists! Thank you Sarah for speaking about this!! And for calling out the beta curls for what they are!!
What's a real artist?
@@markuss4133 People with a talent for art that could recreate those pictures with a pencil. People who feed an algorithm by pressing buttons are not artists.
I don't think so. We all want our "art" to come from real people.
You will have to prove it, though. :) E.g. by filming yourself while creating.
...of course, artificial intelligence WILL end lower arts, like web design.
It's funny she mentions Hard Knocks Life. Jay-Z wrote a letter and lied about being a big fan of Annie to use Hard Knocks Life to avoid having to pay for use of the sample. The sample clearing process is such an absolute mess that Stones Throw, one of the most well-known "underground" hiphop labels didn't clear samples because the expectation is that they know EXACTLY how many records they will sell and must pay up front based on that. There's no way the Dust Brothers could've made Paul's Boutique anytime in the past 20 years because they too had to ask for forgiveness to create something old from something new. Marvin Gaye's family sued Pharrell because they believed the vibe of Happy was a lot like a Marvin Gaye song. The idea that there's justice or that all art is purely original is BS. I get the threat AI poses to a lot of people's jobs, but it is also just another tool and it's no more guilty of borrowing from other artists than other artists are guilty of borrowing from other artists. It's just better at aping a style.
A little correction. The song was "Blurred Lines", not "Happy". Which doesn't change that the ruling in that case was ridiculous.
More Chumbawumba jokes, less Alabama football coaches as senators.
I feel like that sentence had to be said at least once in this universe, so there it is
This is a well written and executed segment.
Hope somebody takes some of this audio and gives it the old animation razzle dazzle
Sarah as permanent host would be lovely.
She’s definitely been one of, if not the best!
@@newmoon1448she was great the last time
I’m in favor!
@@newmoon1448I agree!! But most likely it will be a bLK person
Hasan would be better
Gotta work both ways
Ask musicians how well the “regulations” have helped THEIR ability to receive compensation for their work!! They make NOTHING or next to it from iTunes and the like!!
Sarah is an amazing host and would be a fantastic person for the permanent position. Please give her serious consideration.
Any work a human creates is also the culmination of what is in their brain, so, bad analogy there. That said, there is a line where any art creation crosses from plagiarism to creativity (based on the previous statement this is always true). OpenAI (which is NOT really AI and I wish people would stop being so manipulated by the marketing lie) needs to 'teach' its models that threshold so it does not produce things below that threshold. And this is completely possible.
Did she just quote Donnie McClurkin??? LOL!
Art needs to be exclusive to humans. Ai art needs to straight up be banned. I dont mind ai tools to help assist with art but ai the does it for you? Nah
Stomach could handle milk my new go to insult. Really funny especially since lacto is my kryptonite.
Wasn't Khan Asian and therefore likely lactose intolerant (like two thirds of the worlds population are)? I think it's quite unlikely his stomach was able to handle milk.
Nailed it !!!
The Daily Show shows subdued closed captioning, because it's hard for non-readers to see the pictures.
Long Story Really Short: Pay Up Mofos.
I enjoyed this piece from Whitney 😊
Dang.... I love Sarah
Sarah Silverman has unlocked the ultimate level of sarcasm when she married a British man, and when she was born Sarah Silverman.
They could have at least asked for an image..with Sarah's smile..
*YOU'RE ALL JUST IGNORANT AND AFRAID OF "A.I."*
An original idea is nothing but a mix of other existing ideas, until one can't easily identify where said "original" idea came from.
We as artists aren't blind to the world, everything we see is what gives us inspiration, without realizing we're constantly collecting data throughout our lives and we dub that later as inspiration or imagination, in reality we're just mixing in different ways what we previously saw. Machine Learning models are doing just that, but at an incredibly larger scope and reach. Now I'm not advocating for random ML models to copy and use other peoples work, but the reality is that we as people have already been doing that for millennia, hence copy-right laws, but when one thing doesn't look exactly like the source, we don't enforce the copy-right law at all, so why are we doing it with an A.I. at all? *Because you're afraid of what you don't understand,* double-standards! Sure we need guard rails, but people are losing perspective on this issue!
Exactly.
she should be the permanent host
Because of personal connection to the issue hostess sounded very sincere. Only sometimes it is not the case( i am not talking about lady Silverman, but about hosts in genereal) , but today the whole story was very honest and reasonble. Loved it
Ok when I heard the opening I thought hmmm, maybe we can finally get the end of ASOIF, So I hope the rest nof the authors win their law suits, where do I get that copy of Winds of Winter?
You know she needs be host on daily show just saying..
They should have doug stanhope post for a week
Comparing AI training to sampling is in my mind problematic as these processes work rather differently. The AI training method seems more akin to taking inspiration from someone elses work. Something that previously only have been a human thing, and defined as fair use (when done by humans). It will be interesting to see how these lawsuits will go. Sadly the laws might not be up for the task of protecting creators rights in this instance. Even if the creators win, I suspect they will end up with the short stick (as they most often do).
It really is sort of halfway between you can get it to cough up whole sections of copywrited material with some work. I don't really trust the companies to self regulate and pay authors anytime they do that.
@@LC-sc3en It's like a kid with an photographic memory. So not like an average human. That might make a difference in court (especially for cases involving text based content), picture and audio will be another can of worms I suspect.
Exisitng copyright laws (in any country) is ill equipped to deal with this new novel type of use/misuse. And it might be that the laws have to be altered before any creator get their fair cut.
Please please more Sarah, this is her media and she is the best since John Stewart. Stop the revolving door.
Just beautiful Sara & Desi
Now I’m going to go listen to the Jay-Z song because it’s stuck in my head. Thank you.
I love this man
Sara is dope!!!
Can we just have Sarah as the permanent host please? She’s awesome
No. There far better choices.
@@nedludd7622you mad bro
@@NekhiaTaylor You can't write a 3-word sentence. I am not your "bro" either.
@@nedludd7622You shouldn’t criticize other people’s grammatical skills. Your previous reply doesn’t have any verbs in it.
🤮🤮🤮🤮
I like Sarah Silverman
Never forget she said that Gazan's don't deserve water or electricity
perfect
Texas Road house Veterans day tomorrow. Stewart couldn't handle milk.
Everyone's already saying it. MAKE SARAH THE PERMANENT HOST! She is fun, we love her, just doooo it!
No
No thanks. I don't want to listen to the Nanny do the Daily Show everyday.
Yes, a Multimillion dollar company goes to the CZcams comment section in the hopes some genius tells them how to do their job.
I thank you in the name of the entire humanity for your great work!
Someone should write a history book about you!
After her pro genocide rant the other week? No thanks.
@@dasstigma Bro, you sound angry. Because I actually thought that would happen? People comment sometimes to express opinion and admiration. We do understand that it is not always realistic. Jeez. I like Sarah, you don't. Who cares. Chill out.
I am an artist; I've worked in nearly every medium, and AI art is so bland! It's copied 'technique' doesn't work! It's so flat and restrictive; lacking any chance of inspiration, creativity, or emotion! AI art is like the cucks who 'created' it: sitting in the corner pretending to be part of the action.
That’s kind of not the point though. 1) You can use it for more than art and 2) image generation is only starting out and will inevitably improve. Thinking humans will forever stay ahead is foolish
I dunno I've seen some pretty amazing AI art. I've also been able to create AI art from ideas in my head where this could have never happened before. It's really amazing and allowed 'regular joe's' to express themselves in ways they never could throughout all human history. However, the problem comes in when these average jos then try to SELL it or pass it off as their OWN. they need to be called out and criticized for that, and possible taken to court for plagiarism. Gotta keep the greed out of it
@@lnt305 humans are ahead though. Humans can create art and have done so for millennia without any software. But the software cannot create art without humans, whether it be the humans giving the prompts or the humans whose works it trawls. So far we don't have a true AI (one that can think for itself rather than have an algorithm that tells it how to think) and it might yet be a very long way coming.
One can create with AI though it will have every job soon.
Hey Comedy Central: This is the next permanent host of the Daily Show. Just make it happen.
Long live self checkouts!
It writes a mean resume!
We've all heard of the horse cart story and the postman right...This is in the open now, there's no going back. The genie is out of the bottle!
For anyone wondering why it's not wrong for humans to learn but the AI needs to pay for "learning" from artists: apart from the fact that the AI is not putting in further work and creativity like a human is, it's also not being paid.
AI is just a tool that people are using to create stuff and the company providing that tool is being paid. And that tool is being powered by the work of artists, who are not.
So a better analogy would be people using software to create/do stuff and the company behind the tool is being paid, but the developers who actually powered the tool are not being paid.
(And yeah I know some of us pirate some softwares but that theft and reward is miniscule compared to what's involved in AI.)
Artists are not in battle with AI for its art, they're in battle with AI creators and users who want to use their art to make the AI better without compensating them.
Its not stealing its a learning from the previous works. RR Martin also read & learned many stories to create his own. Its called Machine Learning not Maching Stealing.
All i know is that i am a humble human being, ready to serve our future robot overlords
RR Martin is nobody friend he's against fan fictions. Worth thinking about even in ai
Sarah joined the MIB
This is probably the BEST comedy snit about ai currently 😂 ai is cool but dang..dang she has made her points well said 😊
Sure.. Tho that doesn't stop her from being a bit wrong about how AI works, and portraying it with a bit of false-narrative misinformation to try and make her claims.
@@GrumpDog to each their own.
1:55 Reddit actually gave me hemorrhoids. But I've been clean for about four years now :)
so if anyone can sue AI programers then artists should sue internet devepers for music piracy through online platforms. this lawsuit will be a groundbreaker if won.
Thats actually the basis for dmca stikes on youtube. Its not the law they are afraid from, it the music and movie industry. Thats why its so easy to strike videos down
It's not that simple, because AI developers are private companies that own the program and may ask for payments for future uses of their products, and why not a certain percentage of the royalties from arts and contents generated by their program, maybe a significant part
And most likely won't pay back artists whose works were used to train their program, using the Fair Use, as Wikipedia does. But does Wikipedia charge you for using their platform ?
@@Random_dud31 the difference with CZcams is that CZcams host the files and keep them in their servers, AI platforms dont do that so they cannot strike down. Unless they have to strike the creation part of the files/artwork. This is a very complex issue
Let's see............does laziness affect hard work?............YES!
Did no one see "Terminator?' This doesn't end well.
We got chumbawamba'd!
In a video regarding plagiarizing, she steals song lyrics and images
I loved the Genghis Khan looks like his stomach can handle milk joke. Mostly because he probably was lactose intolerant and could only handle fermented dairy.
I didn't get that joke. Aren't weak people called "milk drinkers"? So who is weak? People that don't drink milk or people that drink milk. Inquiring minds need to know.
@@saphricpcgaming5182 You are correct that milk is generally considered a weak drink, so not being able to handle that even is extra weak.
@@saphricpcgaming5182 Naturally animals become lactose intolerant as part of becoming an adult. Milk drinker as an insult means you are still a child. It was an adaptation, but the insult remains.
Sarah is a dope host though
So glad to see Sara Silverman back in the chair. If it was up to me, she would be the new permanent host of the Daily Show. Sign her up now! ❤
I preferred Al Franken, but TBH I just wanna see them make a decision so we can get some stability
Desi Lydic for me…
@@Root__314 out of the correspondents, Desi is the only one that I can see being able to pull off being the host.
The problem is, the host is more often than not the straight man to the correspondents when they are interacting. Kosta and Chiang are much better when they are telling the jokes then being the straight man
Don't agree with everything in the lawsuit. However, it should be illegal to profit from AI generated content. People who do, like the "artist" who sold AI generated pictures, should definitely be sued, not the company who created the AI platform.
Not saying these companies don't bare some responsibility. With AI, ppl will lose jobs. I'd love to see an automation tax on these companies and others who automate processes. With that tax directly paid to working citizens as passive income.
Hey Daily Show, your thumbnails usually make the host look like they’re constipated or confused.
How much is Chumbawamuba getting paid for this. Since we're all about compensating artist when we use their work 💰💰💰
❤ love this girl, funny, smart and beautiful!
No idea this AI was going on... TEC has passed me by 🤔🥴
Actually, Mongolians often have a lot of trouble with dairy... anyways....
I went into the Rabbit’s hole’s cellar to see if Genghis was lactose intolerant because I know it takes a gene to process it.
Google-
(Edit: “was genghis khan lactose intolerant”
Cut/copy
In fact, an estimated 90-100% of adults in East Asia and 80% in Central Asia have an impaired ability to digest lactose.
Just 5,000 years ago, even though it was a part of their diet, virtually no adult humans could properly digest milk. But in the blink of an evolutionary eye northern Europeans began inheriting a genetic mutation that enabled them to do so
It may have been the other way around but the point is still valid
The Mongols were some of the first people to be able to digest milk. They were able to move so rapidly by drinking mare's milk for sustenance that gave them more long term energy than their Chinese opponents who were marching on a rice based diet that only provides short term energy bursts.
When I googled lactose tolerance it stated that it started @ 5000bc, which was 7000 years ago, not 5000. We live in the 21st century not the 1st.
@@robo5013 Google seemed to be in the right ball park
It was “Smithsonian mag”
They lied to me.
I would have loved to hear about Ganhis milk army.
I remember Sarah’s joke about her DNA and Ganghis.
Hear hear!
💜
I mean... It's not like you can call the executives real intelligence with personal experience in general creativity.
Art has been around for about fifty thousand years, longer than civilization.
I'm pretty sure OpenAI doesn't make nearly enough to compensate everyone they plagiarize. So basically everyone.
She's wrong. AI does NOT "eliminate that entire creative process" if you're using it correctly, as an artist would. It can just as much become part of and enhance the creative process, as any other tool artists use. If you don't think so, then frankly you're not using it right, and haven't bothered watching someone who does.
AI can indeed be used to create new works.. Not regurgitated copies, as she seems to think. But again, she hasn't put in the effort to actually find the best uses for the tool. She inherently misunderstands how the training process works, just blanket assumes that equates to stealing. It's a baseless and absurd argument. AI is not an atomic bomb, or any kind of weapon, it's a tool of creation. And if it eventually invalidates how people make a living, then our economic system is broken and must change, not the new tools. There is no way to "fairly compensate" you for your content the AI trained off of, because there is no way to attribute any results back to your content unless directly mentioned in a prompt. If there was, the resulting payments would be in minuscule fractions of a penny, so small they'd never add up to anything.
However, AI should be viewed as a creation of society, so that it's corporate/commercial use can be taxed and given back to all of us, as an AI Dividend. Long term, that will be the only way to transition our economy to whatever comes next.
Sampling, if transformative enough, is not stealing. The same goes for AI art. We don't go after the audio software used for sampling, we go after the users who use it to directly copy too much.
Please make Sarah the permanent host.
Since any and all output of an artificial intelligence must be derivative, how can anyone charge anything for it's output?
I keep coming back to this thought too. Like would you (the artist) get paid a flat fee for having your work used in the model training? If so, what if it's something initially obscure and you'renot paid much for it, but then there's huge demand for the work next year and it's suddenly a more valuable part of the model? It would be nice if we could get a breakdown after each generation to see what percent of the image/sound/ writing was from which training set
Lol, that real giggle that broke character. Art team 1 actor team 0
Nobody can sample music anymore because it’s too expensive…
What about fair use?
As an artist myself, (visual arts), I totally agree. The worst is that so many of us who share our work online now have to worry about our work being used (abused) by AI bots. How many of us have time to devote to chasing this stuff down? Very few. Nor can most of us afford the lawyers to go after these guys.
Just because one can do something doesn't mean they should.
George Martin is an AI
AI doesn’t impact art, it impacts an artist’s ability to make money with their art. If people didn’t have to earn money to survive, AI would just be a fun way for people without learned art skills to create art. AI, like the Luddite’s mechanical looms before them, isn’t the problem. Capitalism is.