I truly hate how people try to worm their way out of these discussions with their "um actuallys". I'm extremely confident a majority of artists did not consent

I truly hate how people try to worm their way out of these discussions with their "um actuallys". I'm extremely confident a majority of artists did not consent to this use of their work. You can define whatever you want or make whatever shitty legal argument you want, the AI companies knew what they were doing was unethical or they would have released some provenance with respect to their training set. This is very new and a legal grey area. I don't think we need to mince a lot of words to state that clearly the work of artists is being exploited here without credit, consent, or compensation. These models simply would not exist without alienated labor. These products are clearly intended to be a substitute for artists work. If it's determined to be legal, fine, but society doesn't have to pretend you're not a piece of shit for doing this stuff.