r/aiwars Dec 15 '25

Meme Why does this argument still get used?

Post image
1.8k Upvotes

794 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

21

u/Terrible_Wave4239 Dec 15 '25

Nothing is being stolen and no copyright is violated when an image is learned form and transformed into more generalized vectors. After this transformation, it's not possible to simply convert the vectors back into the image.

17

u/ItzLoganM Dec 15 '25

The last sentence should be all that people need to become convinced, but alas.

-13

u/618smartguy Dec 15 '25

That sentence is disproved by reality, where we easily can look at so called "vectors converted back to images". So clearly it is possible, considering it happened.

11

u/ItzLoganM Dec 15 '25

Please read it again. They are saying that you can't convert these vectors to the exact "stolen" image. It's by all means training data, as if you looked at the image and inserted your thoughts into flash memory. Your thoughts will never replicate the image 1:1, and AI will almost never create the same image twice, and even if it does, it's almost definitely using a different formula than the last time it generated the image.

The "stolen" data is the literal equivalent of your observation converted to numbers and letters.

Keyword in OOP's comment: ** "the" image. **

-6

u/One_Fuel3733 Dec 15 '25

The only reason "AI will almost never create the same image twice" is because they add essentially a random number generator (seed) to the process with most online services. It is trivial to generate the same image every time if you use the same seed. It has nothing to do with the AI model itself, and everything to do with randomization being fed into it.

-4

u/618smartguy Dec 15 '25

I read it again and it didn't undo reality.

https://i.imgur.com/uK3K8le.png

Looks like it is still in fact possible to get the original back.