I don't see the issue. The thing I can't move past with generative AI is that it wouldn't exist without the labour of people who post things for free on the internet, but it's displacing those same people from their day jobs. Legal or not, I think having your own work used against your will to harm you is something to be justifiably angry about.
And many pro-AI communities sweep the issue under the rug, consider it invalid in some way, or just over-discussed and boring. They have to, because it's uncomfortable and it has no solution. There is no generative AI without scraped datasets. But the consequence of ignoring the issue is that you might be surprised when you encounter a large group who are still very (justifiably) angry about it. Bluesky has a large community of people who post art for free on the internet.
You can't expect them to be civil either, when so many countries are in a cost of living crisis. No one faces losing their home or health insurance and thinks "I'd better be polite to the people doing it," and a high profile developer posting publicly about implementing a long-asked-for feature with AI is exactly what the AI marketing machine needs. A lot of devs are wondering whether AI-generated code is good or slop, and it's the opinion of other respected devs that sways them.
Also, let's not forget that PDN isn't FOSS. Linux platform knowledge was scraped from FOSS Linux software, trained into AI, and is being used to port a closed source program to Linux where it will displace FOSS alternatives. And the dev expects a pat on the back from the community? Why?
Bluesky is pretty decent and has features that I like over X, but much of its user base are from the Great Xodus (pardon the pun): people who frame their switch to Bluesky as some kind of boycott of X, ie, a bunch of moralists. They didn't leave X because it's a hellscape of trashing and toxicity, no, they left because the politics changed. And so Bluesky is now saturated with people who are very opinionated, very loud about it, and very willing to engage in trashing.
Nah, Twitter is still absolutely rotten with toxicity. The Great Xodus happened due to the rapid chuddification of Twitter under its new management: it was over politics, not toxicity. As such they brought the toxicity with them like a plague.
Bluesky has this nice feature where you can mute lists, so someone made a MAGA list (https://bsky.app/profile/skywatch.blue/lists/3l53cjwlt4o2s), and yet I was still seeing MAGA stuff on my feed because all the Twitter refugees were screenshotting Twitter nonsense and laundering it into my feed. Utterly ridiculous.
I find myself agreeing with this a lot, as well as the secondhand amplification many do. I get some want to brigade but often times that very action is what leads to all sorts of awful content coming upon social media feeds in general, because they simply have to show others how awful this thing they saw was.
Its not exclusive to bluesky by any margin, but it does become especially concerning as a double standard to filter lists.