I don't see a problem with people who aggregate content for money. They're providing a valuable service sifting through the vast sea of potentially interesting

I don't see a problem with people who aggregate content for money. They're providing a valuable service sifting through the vast sea of potentially interesting content and presenting it in a manner that is efficient and entertaining to consume. The information itself is not valuable, being shown that information in an efficient and timely manner is valuable. If you've posted your ideas or works freely on a platform that does not restrict access to it (Twitter, Reddit, HN, etc), then it is not a scarce resource and simply does not have value that can be stolen from you. Aggregators are giving it value by making it visible to their audience. This all feels analogous to someone telling a joke to their friends. One of the friends taking the joke and claiming it as their own is a dick move, but we all accept that the joke was freely given away and that the other friends aught to be able to retell it without being forced to credit the original author every time they retell it (or pay them if they make money telling it at some point). It's an idea; once you freely enter it into the public sphere you don't and shouldn't have control or ownership anymore; it belongs to society.