I think one of the things that really isn't being picked up about this, is that this isn't just about copying. Hollie Mengert isn't only objecting to her work b

I think one of the things that really isn't being picked up about this, is that this isn't just about copying. Hollie Mengert isn't only objecting to her work being stolen. She's objecting to having her name associated with it - and she's objects because she doesn't think it's good. And she's absolutely right. People really aren't engaging much with that as a problem for this tool. I'd put a simple test to you - sit and look for 1 minute at each of the images she created and the machine created. There's a very simple way of telling who did what. The longer you look at Hollie's images the more you notice. The longer you look at the generated images the less it makes sense. The perfect example of this is the image of the woman in the middle of the party - there is so much more going on it that single image than all of the generated images together - the focus and composition, and the interaction of the different characters are features basically missing from most of the generated images. I do wonder if a large blind spot of the engineers who are working on this is that they don't actually understand art and therefore don't understand what they're missing.