Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s great that you have sympathy for illustrators, but I don’t see a big difference if the training data is a novel, a picture, a song, a piece of code, or even a piece of legal text. As my mom retired from being a translator, she went from typewriter to machine-assisted translation with centralised corpus-databases. All the while the available work became less and less, and the wages became lower and lower. In the…
Here’s the argument: The output of her translations had no copyright. Language developed independently of translators. The output of artists has copyright. Artists shape the space in which they’re generating output. The fear now is that if we no longer have a market where people generate novel arts, that space will stagnate.
I don't see too many people defending artists also calling for people to start buying handmade clothing and fabrics again.
That said and because people on here are feisty, I have many artist friends and I deeply appreciate their work at the same time as appreciating how cool diffusion models are.
The difference being of course that we live in a modern society and we should be able to find a solution that works for all.
That said, humans can't even get in something basic like UBI for people and humans consistently vote against each other in favour of discriminating on skin colour, sex, sexuality, culture. Meanwhile the billionaires that are soon to become trillionaires are actively defended by many members of our species, sometimes even by the poor. The industrial age broke our evolved monkey brains.