There is a valid moral point to be made about AI that is trained on the work of people who did NOT authorize that use of their work, which will then reduce the need for that work (meaning, reduce the incomes of such people or even make then unemployed).
As far as I know there is not a single AI used for vibe-coding which was trained on content whose makers willfully authorized that use of the content they made.
So whilst your point is valid for broader ML (and I personally agree with it), it is not sufficient to morally justify the kind used for vibe-coding or pretty much any LLMs or image generation AI engines, as they’re all trained on content not produced for or authorized for that purpose.
IMHO it’s only sufficient to morally justify things like character recognition or some forms of voice generation were the training dataset was properly authorized for that purpose.
There is a valid moral point to be made about AI that is trained on the work of people who did NOT authorize that use of their work, which will then reduce the need for that work (meaning, reduce the incomes of such people or even make then unemployed).
As far as I know there is not a single AI used for vibe-coding which was trained on content whose makers willfully authorized that use of the content they made.
So whilst your point is valid for broader ML (and I personally agree with it), it is not sufficient to morally justify the kind used for vibe-coding or pretty much any LLMs or image generation AI engines, as they’re all trained on content not produced for or authorized for that purpose.
IMHO it’s only sufficient to morally justify things like character recognition or some forms of voice generation were the training dataset was properly authorized for that purpose.