Look at what AI created for Polar Express 2

there is a facebook group that is stealing photos from various railroad photographers, running them through an AI filter, and then reposting as original. Very annoying.

it should be
Polar Express 2:THE QUICKENING

And then spams other groups with obvious fakes.

I was asked a few months ago where I saw ATOM Rail in 10 years.

I jumped on an AI generator and then sent them these images for giggles.

It was fun to see what it churned out, but can see the downside as well. My parents and even my wife have shown me images and I've had to tell them it was AI.

Without necessarily 'feeding the hand that bit me', I can disclose that you don't need AI to get into legal cease and desist territory.

I had a client with a concept of a rather well-known rail fantasy movie, he had equipment that could be modified to rather closely resemble it, and a plan to run it under license. When the Photoshopped concept versions of the equipment were sent (along with an official inquiry to said legal department of said entertainment firm for initial discussion) the reaction was immediate, angry, and memorable, with a very official cease and desist, delete all images, never talk to us again, and if we even hear about it we will aggressively prosecute.

Where are those guys now when you need them?

I've also been around long enough to remember when UP tried to officially license everything up to and including the color yellow, that finally got retracted after national embarrassment and the executive involved was appropriately dealt with.

They've turned their attention to the music industry. There are now huge lawsuits against AI music generation companies for copyright infringement. AI learns from copyrighted material without appropriate licensing. What I find amusing are the raging debates in the background between the musicians and the wannabes who use AI and call themselves musicians. But, I digress. I'd be careful with AI anything until this settles out. If the music industry wins, and they have legit grounds to stand on, they could possibly go after the AI users, too.

I haven't heard anything concerning images yet though I honestly haven't looked. The results of the music AI lawsuits would easily apply to the benefit of photographers and their distributors. Since Congress isn't likely to act, the courts are going to decide.

If you haven't been bored enough by this thread, may I bore you a bit more?

The Copyright Office has released Part Two of their Artificial Intelligence Report that addresses the legal and policy issues related to copyright and artificial intelligence. Part Three - not released yet - will address the legal implications of training AI models on copyrighted works, including licensing considerations and the allocation of any potential liability.

If you use AI for any kind of content creation and think it's covered by copyright, Part Two is something you should read. Part Three, when released should also be a must read.

https://www.copyright.gov/ai/

Hey! I saw you yawning.

One last post. Yer on yer own to follow.

A federal judge last August opened the way for artists, and likely photographers, to sue AI image generation companies for copyright infringement. It's already started....

Yeah, I think 10 years hence, this AI generated content thing will seem rather silly and a passing fad.

It basically dooms itself because of the training source material problem. Right now AI is in a sweet spot where it can find plenty of human-created source material. See, 20 years ago, webmasters trying to do SEO would pay Bangladeshis a nickel a page to hand write "content" merely as search engine seeds to try to rank in search results. They had elaborate word processors to help the authors get just the right keyword density etc. Obviously now you make that with AI. And before too long, the Internet is glutted with AI content. The sites doing it won't tell you it's AI.

And now where do you go for training material?

So it won't take long before AI is Oruroboros, the snake eating itself… training itself on its own output. I.e. in a few years, AI will believe humans have 6 fingers. Common errors that AIs tend to make will become memetic because they're all doing it telling each other it is correct.

I foresee a day when content creators need to pretty much prove they're human. I can't help noticing how Youtube and Tiktok videos are becoming perceived as more authoritative/authentic, perhaps because it's still impracticable to make an AI Youtube infuencer that looks and sounds right.

One came out this morning on my Facebook feed showing an 'abandoned' L&NE RS3 in front of a railroad tunnel, saying it was a 'abandoned discovery'. Unit number was clear enough to verify it had been sold to L&N and taken in a trade back to GE. Fake.

It was done so poorly it's hard to believe anyone could actually be fooled, but there you go.

The headlight was on! But overgrown vegetation was added to it, blended in quite nicely.

Oh, and when I call these out as fake, I'm getting trolled and accused of 'not appreciating art'.

At the Amherst Railroad Hobby show AI train images were very prevalent on a lot of crappy merchandise. Unfortunately Boomers tend to fall for this stuff and buy it, or share the image on Facebook of a guy with six fingers and three arms in a wheelchair with the text "This vet is getting no love type Amen" still I have managed to get some good songs. https://suno.com/song/b027a997-9e8c-4e7 ... 318f09586d

Suno, Udio, et al are under fire right now and maybe not lookin' too good. A federal judge has just ruled against fair use in another AI case which sets precedent for all the other AI suits. I'd say you can play with Suno for personal use but at this point, I'd be very wary of publishing anything made with Suno, especially if it is monetized. You could be on the hook for copyright infringement. Just so ya know....