"It's already invented" is not a point.

"Nothing can be done about it" is also not a point.

"Tech is neutral" is also not a thing.

The "tech isn't inherently evil" is a tired argument and doesn't applies. Current models have been developed with hoarded data that was taken without consent of it's creators to be used to compete directly against them, all knowingly (with proof) and anyone who defends the practice is complacent in the act, there is no way to recreate it without the mass amounts of data- just the creation of it involves and immoral act not to mention the handing of it to the public all willy-nilly. You started the discussion by basically claiming that tech has to exist now because it's out and is (somehow) untouchable. You are trying to take the easy road out because, just like you said, feel like it doesn't effects you in a personal way and thus trying to talk others who are trying to speak up into being content with what was done. I can't think of a position that lacks compassion this much. You don't sound angry either.

We are poisoning the well, we are in the politics around the globe, we are trying to bring social change while some people are sitting back and saying "nothing we can do I guess" while the solution requires us to be visible. Don't be okay with the wrong. Your stance is also a part of the problem as it just accounts to "Deal with it." which amounts to nothing in this this discussion.

The bad things being done are being done -with- AI, not because of it.

Is there a difference between that? If this tech wasn't handed to the members of public without any checks people would not have a way to harass both small and established artists and force them into taking a defensive stand. With our because of it, the few companies who gave away what they stole cause this and some people are complicit in the act, even defending it. It's bad being done very willfully.

When you claim "There is nothing you can do about bad things in the world" do you realize that the natural conclusion of that is closing of the advocacy groups? Yeah, let's accept bad as it is, not like people know how to change their behavior if they are thought the consequences of it. Not like slavery, corruption or labor extortion will go away by itself.

Just say it as it is, you want this stuff to exists because either it benefits you or doesn't harms any of the groups or thing you are into so you want to give it a leeway.

Honestly, that says more about you than them and how you view people.

Why people should be allowed to knowingly do wrong things out in the open? If they can't justify what they are doing how will they get away with keep doing so in the long term? Why give them a shield?

Ah yes, because we knows that if everyone does it and a lot of money is invested in it an act clearly known to be wrong will suddenly become right; like systematically hoarding labor as content and than reselling it on their behalf without having to get their consent or paying them.

This got to be one of the best video essays touching on almost every core problem with ML and is an essential. My only complaint being the "Well, there is no going back now" point made. However, everyone who thinks they should defend ML should watch this video at last once before moving forward.

It's just community just starting out. r/artisthate was like that for the first few weeks too until a significant number of regulars emerged. Internet is also very open towards uncritical ML fanaticism that hates critics with a burning passion, and god, are they not loud.