I get the impression that many peoples' grievance with generative AI (text, code, images etc.) isn't _really_ about the data provenance. Or at least, it feels s

I get the impression that many peoples' grievance with generative AI (text, code, images etc.) isn't _really_ about the data provenance. Or at least, it feels secondary, compared to the general disruptive nature of the tech. If tomorrow someone released a StableDiffusion, CoPilot etc with the same functionality, but respecting the provenance of the data (i.e. licensing etc), what concrete difference would this make? Programmers and other creative professionals would still (reasonably) be nervous about the implications for their livelihoods and communities. At some point it will be possible to prompt a model for music in the style of <random artist>, and having never heard <random artist>, the model will generate a convincing emulation, based purely on statistical knowledge gleaned from millions of unrelated songs and text pairs. (I give it 5 years). Now what? <random artist> should still be concerned (or not), but at least we're talking about the correct issue: How do we co-exist with generative models that massively disrupt/alter the process of doing creative or intellectual work?