5 ms·

The problem with this idea is that it operates on the assumption that consumers will actually care about "provenance" on art. I just don't really buy that the

The problem with this idea is that it operates on the assumption that consumers will actually care about "provenance" on art. I just don't really buy that the set of people who care about that will be big enough for artists to care about signing up for some kind of provenance-tracking regime. Obviously there will be some people in that category on both sides, but I think it'll be niche. I have a hard time imagining Taylor Swift or Drake or whoever is going to start blockchaining their songwriting so that no one can say they used AI. It won't be a big enough segment of their market to care. (and in fact, the first time Taylor Swift does some big AI-generated video or whatever, all of a sudden a whole bunch of people will suddenly decide they're cool with it)

TimPC 1mo ago
There seems to be a huge backlash to existing works where AI was detected already at least in my art (creative writing). So I think we already have evidence consumers care. I don't think blockchaining is the solution for the general public, but I'd probably do exactly that if I was taking a university course these days since they tend to be hyper sensitive about AI and err on the side of the accuser so I want strong evidence my writing is mine. Which of course is ridiculously insufferable because I used to do a good portion of my homework in paper notebooks on the subway without stable internet.