任时光匆匆流去 谁的“刺金时代”将闻风而来？
| Wikimedia Commons AI | |
|---|---|
.png) | |
| Status of the proposal | |
| Status | rejected |
| Reason | zero support Dronebogus (talk) 11:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
| Details of the proposal | |
| Project description | Currently, there is great debate on Wikimedia Commons about the policy of AI-generated media, by which I mean images, sounds and videos (see here). I read all the suggestions and ideas and came up with a brand new idea: we separate AI-generated media from human-made media. But how can we accomplish this? My idea would be to create an entirely new Wikimedia project using the same principles as Wikimedia Commons, but only for AI-generated media. Human-made media are posted on Wikimedia Commons and AI-generated media are posted on Wikimedia Commons AI. To my knowledge, this would solve almost all dilemmas regarding AI-generated media on Wikimedia projects. |
| Is it a multilingual wiki? | It works exactly the same as Wikimedia Commons, except that only AI-generated media are posted on Wikimedia Commons AI. |
| Potential number of languages | See above. |
| Technical requirements | |
| New features to require | Not applicable to my knowledge. |
Proposed by
[edit]Explanation
[edit]You can read S. Perquin's vision and the underlying philosophy here.
Domain names
[edit]Advantages
[edit]- A clear separation is created between human-made images, sounds and videos and those generated by artificial intelligence. This makes it easier for users to identify AI-generated media.
- Websites using MediaWiki's software can decide for themselves whether they would implement InstantCommonsAI. Now it is impossible for websites using MediaWiki and InstantCommons not to allow AI-generated media, because everything is mixed together.
- Wikimedia Commons would not become overloaded with AI-generated media, allowing for better visibility and distinction of human-made media.
Discussion
[edit]- See the talk page.
There are many disadvantages about Wikimedia Commons AI, because nothing is ideal. That's why I'm curious about this. What do you think are problems that could arise and how could they be solved? Let's discuss!
Personal determination
[edit]Once you have read up on various views regarding AI-generated media on Wikimedia Commons and the proposal of Wikimedia Commons AI itself, you can express your personal determination here. Please tell briefly how you arrived at your conviction. Thank you in advance!
People interested
[edit]People doubting
[edit]
It is doubtful To quote Socrates, I know that I know nothing. I think my idea could be a solution to the discussion on AI-generated media, but I am not sure. Nevertheless, I will defend my idea, even though I may be playing devil's advocate, because I believe it could be a future solution. S. Perquin (talk) 11:23, 20 January 2024 (UTC)- Reasonable idea but doesn't need its own website; this could be a category + infobox for a general more-flexible Commons, such as NCCommons. –SJ talk 21:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion! Kind regards, S. Perquin (talk) 15:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
People not interested
[edit]
Strong oppose first and foremost: it’s nearly impossible to approve a new project, and doing so requires both godlike patience and overwhelming support. It took seven years to develop and approve the latest project, Wikifunctions, and three years to launch it. Even the most popular Wikiproject proposals have been in “development hell” for a decade or more. Secondly, this is wholly and obviously redundant to Commons, failing the most basic principle of new projects to fill a completely unique niche. Thirdly, creating a truly gargantuan w:wp:content fork is an extremely bad reason to start a new project. Finally, a project based on a zeitgeisty new technology that you admitted may be demolished by legal issues in coming years is not going to stand the test of time— even if AI art is here to stay and survives both the populist loathing of Wikimedians, artists, and the general public and a hypothetical tsunami of copyright violation cases, it would then likely cease to be controversial or even just become a dead medium like 8-tracks or laserdisc. Dronebogus (talk) 06:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion! Please see my response on the discussion page. Kind regards, S. Perquin (talk) 08:51, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose It's not a good idea. We need to wait to long and there are legal objections. EU is looking for laws against AI I think. First step of EU. Groempdebeer (talk) 08:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion! Please see my response on the discussion page. Kind regards, S. Perquin (talk) 08:55, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose waste of resources and donation money. Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion! Please see my response on the discussion page. Kind regards, S. Perquin (talk) 19:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It's interesting but agree with Dronebogus above in regards to redundancy. It's somewhat redundant to the branches of the well-working category system of WMC where all media made using AI should be located in – Commons:AI-generated media. AI media could thus be easily excluded or explored and maintained separately from other contents there. It's also possible to have a tag for images made using AI or maybe even requiring all such images to only be in AI-specific subcategories so that it's clear already from the category page / the thumbnail or file-title that it's not a human-manually-made image/video. It would make such contents much less findable even when they could be very useful or the AI aspect is not that large – for example if just a small part of an image is made or modified using AI or videos that were redubbed using reviewed machine translation transcripts to AI-generated voice. I think a better approach would be something like a WikiProject for Wikimedia Commons or Wikimedia, I'd be interested in that or maybe something else like that but not 'a separate Wikimedia project for AI media' in particular. --Prototyperspective (talk) 11:30, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion! Please see my response on the discussion page. Kind regards, S. Perquin (talk) 14:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - The three listed "advantages" are not an advantage at all. 1. No it does not make it easier to identify. If an image is used in Wikipedia, I still see no difference. And if a difference can be seen, this does not need a separate platform. 2. If the data (that it is AI generated) is properly stored, this can be easily retrieved without having to build a whole new platform. If this point is a problem, easier solutions can be thought of. 3. Having a separate platform doesn't reduce the possible situation of getting overloaded (still the same amount of work), it only moves it and creates a lot extra work. Because of duplicity a lot of extra work needs to be put in duplicating the full Wikimedia Commons infrastructure! The domain names are not properly chosen: commons.wikimedia.ai.org would mean that the organisation ai would have a section for wikimedia, in which the section commons. Wikimedia is not in the position to create a new organisation regarding AI. To conclude: this proposal provides zero solutions, and makes a possible situation worse. Romaine (talk) 12:29, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your opinion! Please see my response on the discussion page. Kind regards, S. Perquin (talk) 20:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)