Raw LLM Responses

I listened to 16 minutes or so before I started making this comment. So, I'm an AI Data Trainer, while most of my experience is with LLM training, I think that experience can still extend to talking about picture generation. I think it's fair to claim that it's wrong of these companies to use art that isn't paid for in order to train their models, but at the same time I don't think it matters in the long run. The technology is going to get where it's going no matter what, and if you actively poison models then you'll just be delaying the issue, and not for long, since poor data can and will be sifted out of the training set through both automated and human review. And in the unlikely chance that your poisoned art, or someone else's, does happen to make it into a model, the entire sum of humanity's previous body of art still exists. What you make now, a month from now, a year from now, compared to what's already been uploaded, scraped, and digested isn't likely to have much of an effect. Finally. I think it should be considered that this technology is not going to be stopped until we hit the limits of what it's capable of. No matter what you or anyone else does, there's a country out there who will continue devoting its resources to this and trying to get to the top of the hill regarding AI for the potential advantages it brings.