Personal Feelings
As primarily a fan-artist I understand that my opinions and feelings on this might seem misaligned with the reality of my situation. However, with the way genAI works it glosses over something I hold dearer then "the law"; which is the attribution or crediting of source material and above all else dignity and quality of a human life. I don't claim to hold ownership over the world or characters I create art for, I value the time and effort of both the original creators and other fan-artists in the spaces I occupy. As a creator I value my own time and effort as well, and would hope that others would feel the same way, and would thus do me the decency of telling people where the art came from should they share it. I don’t think my perspective is a necessarily unique one in the artist space, but I do feel at times that I am much less rigid on how attached to "don't copy don't trace don't steal" I am, especially these days.
I am not ashamed to admit now that as a young artist (perhaps 11-13) I would trace others work and claim it as my own, and now with the perspective of adulthood I can only think it would be hypocritical of me to claim that I truly care if beginner artists are out there tracing my work and saying they did it. Mostly I think to myself "Well, you could choose literally anyone else, but OK." in this hypothetical scenario, because at the end of the day this effects me so little that I would likely never even know if it was being done.
Secondarily on the topic of tracing: I would not be the artist I am today had I not done it, and grown out of it, and gotten the perspective as to why I needed to grow out of it. Tracing can teach you, but it can and does hold you back, especially if you're not doing it like a professional and instead doing it to be an art machine that wants to generate validation (like I was).
Why do you care about genAI if you don't care* about theft?
Generally I don't like to bring morals into art and art creation, as the topic can get messy very quickly and what someone writes/draws/films/sings/etc to discourage or speak out about or advocate for visibility for; someone else might take as fully endorsing said topic because as artists- even in today’s world- we don't live in each others minds and can't always read a persons true intentions. And also people can lie.
However there is a difference, to me, when talking about the morals of theoretical harm (e.g. the book Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov; it is a piece of literature that if one actually reads it depicts the main character distastefully, however the popular culture surrounding it, and thus popular opinion of the text would have you thinking otherwise, and thus people talk about the moral and theoretical harm the book may have caused actual bad actors to participate in) versus actual, or objective, harm (e.g. actual filmed or photographed CSAM).
GenAI falls into both categories for many people; the theoretical harm of lost revenue due to lack of accreditation and the objective harm it is causing to the environment and the people that live in the locations where the data centres are built.
*I care, a little, because I am a human person and like all humans I like when my effort and work is appreciated as my work and effort; but I am also mature enough to know that I can't claim to be on some sort of high ground here with my history when I was a young artist myself. At the end of the day, though, I can't control the actions of others and if someone- for some reason- is going to claim my work as their own either passively (through lack of attribution) or actively (by saying they themselves made it) then there's nothing I can do about that except 1) watermark my work and 2) ask that they consider me a person before they consider me an artist.
On the Theoretical Harm of genAI
As discussed I don't have a strong opinion on this. I used to; but as more time passed and more opinions were shared by other artists I admired and respected I came to settle somewhere on a side more aligned with my true feelings rather then my gut reaction. Which is to say; while I care about accreditation, and prefer to share from a direct source, and always save images with the artist name and where it was posted/where I found it (media preservation is important, some of my favourite artists ever deleted their profiles and I have lost art of theirs forever that I would have loved to see again).
The truth of the matter is that most people using genAI don't and didn't care about accreditation or paying artists even before it existed. Large companies- hell even small ones- don't brag about who designed their logo and packaging. And the individuals most using genAI either would never have considered or bothered Commissioning an independent artist in the first place, or were too broke to ever bother.
On the Objective Harm of genAI
This is why I care, and why I don't want my art being fed into the machine (as much as I can avoid it at this point, at least).
Data centers are often built in marginalized communities that are underfunded and already at risk for adverse health effects, often relying on backup generators that must be used and tested often due to the overwhelming demand they put on a power grid that is not built nor equipped to handle the power increase, quote:
"the generators spew noxious chemicals into the air. These include fine particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and volatile organic compounds — a smoggy stew linked to lung cancer, respiratory ailments and higher risks of cardiovascular disease, cognitive decline and early death. Data centers also fuel pollution indirectly. The huge amount of electricity they devour is typically produced using gas or, even dirtier, coal."[1]
affecting total air quality to a staggering degree, something close and personal to me as someone who grew up next to and near multiple processing plants that at some points would stain the front door of my home, with us having no way to know or check what chemicals were causing this and what we were thus breathing in.
The air quality however is not the only negative health effect reported by those in communities living close to these data centers quote: severe migraines, vertigo, nausea, panic attacks, and permanent hearing loss. The constant, low-frequency roar of cooling fans has been described as a “dull, inescapable hum” that rattles windows and disturbs sleep.
[2] these claims are not to be dismissed as noise measurements came in to "90–100+ decibels" for the area tested which is about or over double the common standard limit of 55dBA for residential areas according to Noise Level Standards for a Residential Area at LegalClarity.org[3].
This all isn't even touching the water consumption it takes to cool an entire data center to keep everything operational, and with just how steep the demands of the processors are for genAI there has been an ongoing back and fourth debate between the public, private AI companies, and researchers trying to pinpoint exactly how much water a single data center needs to consume to run and if that "really matters" or "even makes a dent". Depending on the source of the water some would claim it's fine, even, because it's not potable any way. That, however, is beside the point that the common person against AI and the researcher is trying to make, I believe, which is this: that water, despite all that we have of it, and the water cycle, is a finite resource for many of the places these data centers are being built. And some of them are using potable water to cool their systems. And even without that bleak statement I will leave you with this quote:
"Landon Marston, a professor in environmental and water resources engineering at Virginia Tech University, points out that since companies like Meta and Google tend to choose areas outside of cities to construct these data centers, the surge in water demand could also necessitate water infrastructure updates, the costs of which could fall partly on local ratepayers."[4]
Some good videos to watch as well, if you care or have the time:
Disclaimer: While I have watched the videos and may agree with the general overview of the content, my opinions are still my own and stated above, these are just further resources if you are interested in more content and context.
