It’s not rough. Her art is nice. And I’ve also seen a lot of other work that looks like it. Years dedicated to the profession or not.

Maybe she’s closer to the origin of the style than most?

Anyway I spent all my life writing code and I’m not upset when someone uses patterns I came up with, especially if they credit me.

I feed your code in to CoPilot, I've now got my super app. All those years you've spent coding, learning, refactoring, now done by AI in mere seconds.

Why should I credit you? I don't need to credit you, why should I feel the need to credit you? AI produced the product. You'd feel pretty annoyed right?

If you knew anything about software development and had actually used copilot you'd know this is a specious argument.

I have roughly a hundred git repos. Do I care if somebody based an AI autocomplete off my code? Not even a little bit, I've never given a shit if somebody steals bits and pieces of my code because that's like if I lifted a few paragraphs out of a book somebody wrote, who cares if the book that I'm producing is fundamentally different?

I do. No I am not a software development. I'm a system administrator. I do write code and I would be pissed if some AI came along, took it and regurgitated it for someone else.

I take pride in what I write. I don't write it for someone to come and steal it. Sure if I had posted my code online, than I can expect it to be copy & paste but not for the usage of AI.

Not at all. I love the idea of Copilot and similar systems!

https://youtu.be/gAjR4_CbPpQ

I have a tiny issue with those systems if/when they output certain memorized content. But that’s a type of bug, which can be avoided.

Also I didn’t say I want credit when someone copies my coding style. But if I was being credited, as this woman is being implicitly credited, I would have even less than no reason to complain.

I don't know this specific artist, but the fact that someone dedicated their profession and life to art doesn't mean they're necessarily good.

Or they could dedicate years and be good (or great!) and still not unique.

In fact, the better they get the less likely they are to be unique as more people will imitate their style.

It’s not an art critique.

If she reads it, hopefully she understands the lens of the language. Her style is good, and evidently assiduous.

Everything said remains relevant.

Ah, yes, that clarifies it, thank you. I agree.

Does whether they're good or not actually have any bearing on the legality or morality of copying their work?