I'm just gonna quickly give my opinion on this because why not? If you've read a specific portion of the new ToS, you should notice there's mention of Scratch exploiting user content to create/improve products and services, but it also says after, "including through the training of AI models." Now this specific bit of the ToS is vague as to what content in particular is used here. For all we know, (This next paragraph is speculation, don't take it seriously unless it does come true at a later date.) could be using art or code from people's projects in order to train these anonymous (except facial recognition) AIs. I don't necessarily like the idea of AI's usage in general, as it does have very hefty resource consumption. (electricity, RAM and water) But I will not allow the Scratch Team (abbreviated ST) to rip my work and hand it over to someone on a silver platter, without going through the effort to actually create it. (granted the AI actually works correctly) Allowing the AI to feed on people's creations basically contradicts the rule that disallows projects which use other people's assets without proper credit. It also BETTER not allow you to insert anything you DO generate with it, as it would mean the person doing so learns nothing from it, contradicting the edu in Scratch's URL. Even if the official ST account ( @scratchteam ) announced that it doesn't use scratchers' data, should you necessarily believe what they present in-front of you? Especially from corporations, which typically have the power to silence the truth and evade the consequences. Take Roblox for example. They claim that after doing the age verification, the picture is immediately deleted after processing. But the company their age verification is operated by, (Persona) actually deletes it after 30 days. And due to the costs of running AIs, is it really sustainable for a non-profit organisation? It could end in a lot of money being lost as a result. But hey, that's just a theory, A @DESCEND_MP3 THEORY!
