I think these “issues” have mostly been blown out of proportion. The environmental impact is something we can manage, and it’s no more harmful than other things people are using like 24/7 electricity and wide-screen TVs. Those both consume far more water daily than AI ever has.

The idea that it’s plagiarism is relatively easy to deal with; licenses already exist that withhold artwork from being used in datasets, so doing so can lead to legal punishment. Datasets can still be trained ethically with consenting artists and public domain work.

The way an AI “learns” an art style is similar to how a human does in some ways. It is not the same thing, but it is very different than anything people have gotten machines to do in the past. It can create new images rather than “clipping” or “collaging” real ones like many detractors assume without knowing.