The AI Lighting website is actively taking any uploaded images and training AI to make (edit: AI Generated art. Possibly NFTS, please see edit below.). I've seen some people talking on here about how there's no harm in using Clipdrop because it's teaching them how to properly light things, but nothing about how the program takes your artwork and uses it to make AI generated artwork/NFTs up to five years after you upload stuff.

Artists: do not use services like these. Always be suspicious of sites like these.

I had major hesitation and suspicion upon seeing this as is and now theres actual proof, so....

EDIT:

Sources for the threads above: 1 2

So some people have been saying that just because the co-founder is an NFT bro doesn't necessarily mean that they are using the AI for that specific purpose and I think they're right it's just extremely scummy that they can use your art to create AI Generated images and NFTs are literally AI Generated images, so that's the train of thought that me and many other artists have been concerned about.

 I personally would not want my artwork to be used to teach AI how to make artwork or improve AI generation because i personally believe there's something extremely morally incorrect about taking art from artists, feeding it into an AI, using it to generate artwork, and claiming that artwork as your own. There are threads on twitter that discuss how AI is the creator, the person using the AI is actually the client, and the client in this case is absolutely horrific--

“The reason people are getting increasingly frustrated with AI "artists" is that no, they AREN'T artists. They're nightmare clients. They tell the AI what they want, demand infinite revisions of it, and once finally satisfied, claim the work as their own. I have painted characters and weapons for clients, and while yes, the cool designs they paid me to draw are THEIR concepts, they did not paint it, and they are not calling themselves the artist who did the commission!” - @Anodesu on Twitter

Recently, an AI Generated piece won a contest worth actual money, and many of the artists who lost were rightfully upset.

Something that we need to remember is to listen to artists when they talk about how AI could very seriously take over the market due to the fact that there are so little laws in regards to it, and jobs are already being lost in fields like journalism due to the use of AI generated works.

I think we need to be thinking about these specific questions?

Should it be legal for websites like this to put sneaky things in their TOS in regards to creating AI artwork using any uploaded images?

Should it be legal for creators of AI to feed their AI works that they do not have the rights to to make their AI create artwork?

How many artistic jobs are going to be lost due to AI taking the artwork of others without paying for it, and generating artwork that people don't have to pay for?

These are questions we just don't know the answer to, and with how slow lawmakers have been in terms of privacy laws online, and how slow they've been in regards to NFTs, it's going to be a while before we really see how much this will impact artists and freelancers.

To finish this off, I’d like to post this thread in regards to how AI generated art is art theft:

In my opinion, I am fully against AI generated artwork unless the creator of the AI only feeds art that they have the rights to/permission to. That being said, I believe this kind of thing needs to be an “opt-in” sort of reasoning, meaning if you want to give your artwork to AI, then go for it. But things like Clipdrop and other image-uploading sites make very sneaky additions to their TOS that artists need to be aware of.

Edit (part 2):