Hot take: I got pushback for saying AI art is just a tool, not theft

A few months back, I posted here that AI image generators are no different than Photoshop filters. A user named 'DataDriven' replied with a 2,000 word breakdown showing how the LAION-5B dataset scraped millions of images without clear consent. They argued it's a system built on taking work, not just building on it. I looked into it more and they were right about the scale. I changed my view. Now I think companies training these models need to get permission or pay people, full stop. How do we push for that without killing the tech completely?

3 comments

3 Comments

miles_sanchez24d ago

How is paying for every single image even possible? The whole point is learning from huge amounts of data, not buying a private gallery.

gavin_moore18d ago

So what happens to all the art that's already been taken without permission? Do we just let that slide because it's too hard to fix, or is there a way to make things right for those artists now?

baker.eva24d ago

Man, this is such a common thing now. It feels like every new tech service is built by quietly taking something regular people made and selling it back to us. It happened with social media content, it happened with gig work apps, and now it's happening with creative work. The pattern is always to move fast, take what's there, and ask for forgiveness later. We absolutely need to push for permission and pay, because if we don't set that rule now, it just tells companies this way of doing business is okay. The trick is making those rules clear without letting the big players write all the laws themselves.