> The BIG DEAL is...the fact that the ML crowd think it's OK to take everything without even asking permission

Everything they take was freely given. Thrown into the void. Screamed into the wind. It's weird that people are perfectly fine if someone happens to read their words (at all) and fine if some of those who do read them manage to find something in them that is in any way helpful or useful, but the moment they think someone else might make money as a result of something gained from exposure to those same words it's somehow offensive and everyone starts demanding a cut of (usually non-existent) profit.

The "ML" crowd has just as much a right to read and learn from the words I enter on social media platforms as anyone else. I'm not charging any kind of fee for the words of debatable wisdom, fact checking, or shitposting I "contribute". I didn't ask permission before replying to your comment. Why should anyone feel like they should ask for permission from me to read it? What exactly is "taken" from me beyond the time I voluntarily spent participating in online discourse?

I think I should've put an /s at the end. Its kind of strange that I see constant discussions here and people harrassing small apps/libraries about how their error collection is not OPT-IN. The whole audacity debacle. But data collection for training ML models is perfectly fine because we sure do know the companies who fund the research, how they will get an ROI.