Bowser: “We still believe that what makes our games special is our developers, their artistic capabilities, their insight into how people play. So, there’s always, always going to be a human touch, and a human engagement in how we develop and build our games.”
You missed the point. I’m not talking about just giving a model their library of artwork, which they are within their rights to do.
That model that can parse their artwork had to be developed and refined upon other work. Unless Nintendo is building their own upon their artwork—which I seriously doubt, because that would be a costly undertaking—they’ll be using existing models licensed from somewhere, all of which were developed by stealing from legitimate artists. If they’re using it for idea generation (like an LLM), that text generator was built upon stolen writing.
I’m merely pointing out that it’s ironic for a company that takes such a harsh stance with its fans for “stealing” its IP to be okay with AI.
You assume too many things you don’t know, that’s no way to come to reasonable conclusions unless you mean to come to predefined notions.
I’m okay with a little irrationality this morning. Nintendo can eat shit.
What you’re describing is fine tuning, not model creation.
You can train diffusion models from scratch, even on home hardware, using open source software. It is well with the capability of Nintendo to do this with their own artwork.
Adobe did, they created their models from artwork licensed from artists specifically for training their models.
There’s no reason to think that Nintendo would use public diffusion models when they can train their own and have a model that more accurately reflects their style.