Raw LLM Responses

As a data analyst and aspirant data scientist, with some knowledge in machine learning modeling, I say this: First, I'm one hundred percent on artists side. Second, it's easier to build models that identify art theft (think about Google images looking for similar images, or YouTube's copyright algorithm that searches videos for songs and movies used without permission, but for art) than it is to build models that create art. What this means is: if there was a big industry (like MGM for movies, or WB, or any big music recording company) that had interest in protect the rights of the art (not for the artists, but for their own sake, their profit), these models would be already be running, crawling around the web, identifying images that probably originate from known artists, and notifying/striking/suing the owners and user of the AIs that used their IP. The thing that should be happening, and I stand by other users that commented this, is you guys should unite, start a huge lawsuit, big enough to force these companies to stop doing this shit. I think this will be enough to the big companies of image creating machine learning stop using images that didn't opt in on their contracts (that they should have), and to force the legislative power to start regulating these practices, the same way the regulated Facebook when forced with a situation that demanded it. Now, against users, individuals that could build models, and shady models do not have owners, maybe you should start organizing in a union or an organization that could protect the interests of their associates. Look, if you guys will not have industry behemoths like 20th century studios paying people to create machine learning models that will look for people that are breaking the laws and using your work to feed their own models, than you need to do it (pay the people to find the thieves) yourselves.