> If the model didn't learn anything important from Picasso, it wouldn't be in the training data.
> This whole argument of "ah but it doesnt really need it" doesn't hold up. If the model didn't need it, it wouldn't have used it in the first place.
I haven't seen anyone making this argument. There's a pretty clear difference between learning something from an image and memorizing it.
There also isn't any illegal with memorizing an image and painting a reproduction. What you aren't allowed to do is sell or distribute that reproduction without a license.
I think it makes more sense to restrict what people are allowed do with ML tools than to restrict what ML tools can do.
> This whole argument of "ah but it doesnt really need it" doesn't hold up. If the model didn't need it, it wouldn't have used it in the first place.
I haven't seen anyone making this argument. There's a pretty clear difference between learning something from an image and memorizing it.
There also isn't any illegal with memorizing an image and painting a reproduction. What you aren't allowed to do is sell or distribute that reproduction without a license.
I think it makes more sense to restrict what people are allowed do with ML tools than to restrict what ML tools can do.