Also:
https://eyeofthesquid.com/ai-is-breaking-the-moral-foundation-of-modern-society-a145d471694f
AI renders [Rawls' and Nozick's] disagreement moot by violating the premise they shared. When your talents become training data harvested without consent, when your creative work becomes parameters in a model, you’re being used as a pure instrument. Not for social benefit (Rawls’s concern) and not with your voluntary consent (Nozick’s requirement). You’re raw material extracted for someone else’s capital accumulation. Both philosophers would recognize this as the instrumentalization they were trying to prevent.