It would be a lot cooler if it didn't trawl art without the consent of working artists. Sorry, I know you didn't want to start a conversation about the boring ramifications, and plenty of other folks have already gotten on their soapboxes, but this matters a lot to a lot of people. I'm not gonna demand that anyone stop using it, but there is a larger issue here, so I feel obliged to touch on that with some links for anyone who's interested.
There's a reason why there's an outcry against it. And it's not just complaints about the integrity of the art (though there's that). More importantly, these programs could be far more ethical if they only sampled public domain work, or portfolios volunteered or fairly purchased from artists. As it is, many artists are understandably upset that they now have to compete with programs that have hijacked their work to create bootleg simulacra. Real artists are losing jobs to this stuff. Some are having their style directly replicated because the program incorporated their products without their permission.
If you want some more perspective from the naysayers, I encourage you to browse a few of these threads and articles, if you have the time. It's good to be informed about the impact this is having.
https://twitter.com/JoJoesArt/status...71121829629953
https://twitter.com/kortizart/status...60819368792065
https://twitter.com/ceno02/status/1609895897944449025
https://www.technologyreview.com/202...xhy8m-G_c6Slk0
https://waxy.org/2022/11/invasive-di...L3ZeDU0Ta1BomY
https://arstechnica.com/information-...ning-data-set/