Antis are the corporate bootlickers who would rather protect IP than have ideas shared freely. Y'all ain't punk.
People who are Anti-AI for reasons of "theft" are—intentionally or not—upholding corporate IP being more important than the freedom to share ideas. It's not the small creator, but the corporate giants that the Anti-AI group are defending. To put things into perspective...you are advocating for Metallica where we are fighting for Napster.
The Pro-AI movement is not about gatekeeping how people can create, it is about power of creation in the hands of the people. The feather may be plucked from the eagle, but when set into the aft of an arrow, that very same plume can fell it's creator; i.e., just because a corporation created a tool, doesn't mean they can't be undone by their own creation.
Gatekeeping someone's expression based on if they have the privilege to have access to tools, time, training, and then harassing them for not falling in line with the socially acceptable forms of expression isn't punk.
If you supported Napster back in the day, and are hung up on the "theft" argument of IP ownership, you need to be reminded that this very case is what perpetuated the powers of studios and record labels, at the cost of the independents and disenfranchised.
[We'll talk about environmental impacts and corporate ownership later, much of what you'll probably say is misinformation anyways...the fact that 45% ethonal production in America uses more water than every single data center on Earth combined, or the fact that local models are open-sourced, free to the public, and increasingly available so corporate models are crumbling, or the fact that data centers power the internet, not just AI so this post and every subsequent comment/like/reblog will have more of a footprint then a 1,000 images generated on my desktop.] We can talk about that later, none of those points negate the topic at hand:
Y'all ain't punk. Napster was punk. IP worship belongs to the corporations.
