[sabertoothed]

I have very mixed feelings on this topic. I share your sentiment -- BUT:

Human brains also use anything the human can see, feel, hear for training. And what you produce in terms of creative outcome is a result of your experiences. But you don't owe anyone anything for training your human brain -- even if you use your brain to sell paintings, music etc.

[karpour]

I think it's easy to - seeing the results - draw too many parallels between artificial neural networks and human brains. Art created by humans is very different. Dall-E gets fed tagged images and produces images that match tags. Art created by humans works on an entirely different level.

And I stand by my point, it should be artists who decide whether their work should be used as training data for networks that get commercialized. If your work is used as training data, it is essentially an integral part of a product that is being sold without consent. Does this sound ethical?