I personally believe that AI assisted photos do not have anything wrong with them. If you are working with light or working with pigmentation, I do not think that even requires mentioning that it was done with AI because that is basically just amplifying the tools.
There is no harm if someone has an AI-generated image until they try to use it to deceive someone such as making it look like they are in a place where they are not or showing that they look like someone else when they don’t look like that. I can see platforms like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok or Tinder recognizing if a photo is generated or not and then showing it explicitly or ejecting them from their service based on whether they allow those photos to be used or not for certain purposes.
For example, your profile shot or photos that you post on your timeline, there are apps, plugins, and technology to recognize photos that were generated by AI, and mention whether the photo was generated with AI or not. But that is definitely not on the tool side to provide the watermark because we are providing the tool to create art. And we decide how far we want to go with generative AI.
People can put their signature on their photos or choose not to. We do not require everyone to put our signature on their photos as it’s up to their discretion if they want to do that or not. I think the same rule can be applied to generative AI. In a gallery where people come and pay certain amounts of money for pieces of artwork it is required to have proof of authenticity, and I believe these same rules can be applied.