Says who?
> Is AI contributing to education and/or culture _right now_, or is it trying to make money?
How on earth are those things mutually exclusive? Also, whether or not it's being used to make money is completely irrelevant to whether or not it is copyright infringement.
Artists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAG-AFTRA
> How on earth are those things mutually exclusive?
Put those on a spectrum and rethink what I said.
> completely irrelevant to whether or not it is copyright infringement
_Again_, leave aside law minutiae and hypotheticals.
> Artists.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAG-AFTRA
Do you have a link that has their stance on how AI is harming culture? The best I could find is https://www.sagaftra.org/contracts-industry-resources/member...
I can't find anything in there or its linked articles about culture. I do find quite a bit about synthetic performers and digital replicas and making sure that people who do voice acting don't have their performance used to generate material that is done at a discounted rate and doesn't reimburse the performer.
https://www.sagaftra.org/ongoing-fight-ai-protections-makes-...
> Protective A.I. guardrails for actors who work in video games remain a point of contention in the Interactive Media Agreement negotiations which have been ongoing from October 2022 until last month’s strike. Other A.I.-related panels Crabtree-Ireland participated in included a U.S. Department of Justice and Stanford University co-hosted event about promoting competition in A.I., as well as a Vanderbilt University summit on music law and generative A.I. SAG-AFTRA Executive Vice President Linda Powell discussed the interactive negotiations and A.I.’s many implications for creatives during her keynote speech at an Art in the Age of A.I. symposium put on by Villa Albertine at the French Embassy.
> She said A.I. represents “a turning point in our culture,” adding, “I think it’s important that we be participants in it and not passengers in it ... We need to make our voices known to the handful of people who are building and profiting off of this brave new world.”
This doesn't indicate that its good or bad, but rather that they want to make sure that people are in control of it and people are compensated for the works that are created from their performance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Mouse#Walt_Disney_Produ...
I'm on the Air Pirates side for the case linked, by the way.
However, AI is not a parody. It's not adding to the cultural expression like a parody would.
Let's forget all the law stuff and these silly hypotheticals. Let's think of humanity instead:
Is AI contributing to education and/or culture _right now_, or is it trying to make money? I think they're trying to make money.