"Trained on stolen data" This is emotionally charged wording with a clear confrontational bias and a dark intent to discredit. As someone with over 30 years of

"Trained on stolen data" This is emotionally charged wording with a clear confrontational bias and a dark intent to discredit. As someone with over 30 years of experience with art and artists, do you realize how many influences are present in any given artist? Do you know how many artists use "reference images" heavily? Do you know how many artists trace images (specially in 3D modeling)? By your logic, every piece of art is stolen, if not from other artists, from reality itself. You are insulting every artist present in this forum with your bias. Thanks for that. Also, art made by commission or contract is technically property of the one who paid. Only the top recognized artists get to retain ownership of a specific piece or design done for a company, and even that is rare. How many cases are there where artists jumped ship off a property and needed to make lawyer-friendly pastiches of the characters, because they didn't own the rights? And, the Unet does not store images. This is not a photobasher nor a extreme compression algorithm. You'd know this if you had bothered to try. Which I have. I have trained it on my own artwork and in fact I maintain one of the largest guides about how to train Stable Diffusion using Low Rank Adaptation. You can't just "take out" an image in any exact capacity, and a lot of "proofs" are fabricated using img2img or models trained so aggressively on a single image that it's going to resemble it no matter what (and yet it'll never be reproduced 1:1). People fueled by strong emotions are not incapable of deceit. In fact, it's the stuff you MUST double-check, precisely because fueled by emotions. I'm so disappointed in "tech people" lately.