Not sure what's to hide here. The caveat depends on what data is encoded into the watermark. If it's as simple as the date generated and the system that generated it so that it is easily identifiable as AI generated, I'm fine with it. Hell, I'd even say it'd be cool to embed all of the prompts used to generate the image. If it's also including the name of the user or account ID, then we start getting into gray areas. Since I'm not really on the AI hype train, I'm not all that opposed to that info either. I'll never use it so it won't affect me mindset kicks in on this one, but I'd be okay either way for/against embedding user identifiable info.

> So you are in the"nothing to hide, nothing to fear" school of privacy rights?

No, but you are in the school that teaches that false equivalence is valid rationale.

> Only criminals and bad actors want private defaults

As I was saying.

> The burden of proof is proving there is some harm or problem that needs solving and noone has managed that in this thread or generally.

"Burden of proof" is a concept borrowed from legal practice where the accuser has to offer proof that the accused commited a crime.

No crime is being implied here. Watermarking is actually a useful feature so that people can easily identify images as AI generated.