So like, is Scratch actually training AI off of our work?

Obsolescence

I noticed an announcement made recently that talks about Scratch implementing AI into the site, with a want to “use AI for good”.

This is a bit confusing to me because AI relies on so much processing power that it not only damages the environment, but also damages the lives of everyday people. RAM processors are going for $9,000+, a guy had his power shut off by Microsoft so they could power their own AI machines, and of course we cannot forget what AI does to artists.

In what way is AI actually going to be used for “good” here?
I do not want my projects stolen so people can generate art similar to mine without a creative thought.

“But what about the remix feature? Doesn't that already generate copies of your projects?”
If a person does use the remix feature on my projects, the site automatically credits the original project.
If someone uses AI to generate a project based on something I spent hours making, I am likely not getting any credit.

I've used Scratch as an art platform for years, and if it is going to be using people's art for their AI dataset, then I am probably better off unsharing a majority of my projects. Even if I do that, would the projects still be used for AI even if unshared?

Za-Chary

Obsolescence wrote:
In what way is AI actually going to be used for “good” here?

It's a bit unclear at the moment, but based on what we know, the Scratch Team is planning to add a “Creative Learning Assistant” that will help users code in the Scratch editor. As far as I can tell, it's not really coding a project for a user; it's more so offering hints/tips on what to try next.

Obsolescence wrote:
I do not want my projects stolen so people can generate art similar to mine without a creative thought.

In particular, Scratch has stated that they do not plan to implement any sort of AI image generating feature.

Obsolescence wrote:
I've used Scratch as an art platform for years, and if it is going to be using people's art for their AI dataset, then I am probably better off unsharing a majority of my projects. Even if I do that, would the projects still be used for AI even if unshared?

I'll try to look into the Terms of Service more carefully, but at the moment it's unclear.

redspacecat

Za-Chary wrote:
In particular, Scratch has stated that they do not plan to implement any sort of AI image generating feature.

The new ToS wrote:
The Service may permit users to Submit Input to the Service in order to generate responses, images, recommended software edits, or other AI-generated output (“Output”). “Output” and “Input” are collectively “AI Content”

Za-Chary

redspacecat wrote:
Za-Chary wrote:
In particular, Scratch has stated that they do not plan to implement any sort of AI image generating feature.
The new ToS wrote:
The Service may permit users to Submit Input to the Service in order to generate responses, images, recommended software edits, or other AI-generated output (“Output”). “Output” and “Input” are collectively “AI Content”

Okay, but that's not clear as to what it means. It has been shown before that the Creative Learning Assistant may display suggested Scratch blocks to use, for example. That is an example of an AI-generated image. Nothing that I've seen suggests that the Scratch Team will implement a feature that allows Scratchers to generate any images they want using AI.

Last edited by Za-Chary (Jan. 23, 2026 02:56:38)

Somebuggy

Obsolescence wrote:
I noticed an announcement made recently that talks about Scratch implementing AI into the site, with a want to “use AI for good”.

This is a bit confusing to me because AI relies on so much processing power that it not only damages the environment, but also damages the lives of everyday people. RAM processors are going for $9,000+, a guy had his power shut off by Microsoft so they could power their own AI machines, and of course we cannot forget what AI does to artists.

I'm also thinking about this specifically. I don't know if it matters, everyone and there mom are using generative ai and polluting the air + draining water. It is a WARM Janurary. Scratch may just be another grain of sand to the huge problem.

plum_the_fox

Somebuggy wrote:
Obsolescence wrote:
I noticed an announcement made recently that talks about Scratch implementing AI into the site, with a want to “use AI for good”.

This is a bit confusing to me because AI relies on so much processing power that it not only damages the environment, but also damages the lives of everyday people. RAM processors are going for $9,000+, a guy had his power shut off by Microsoft so they could power their own AI machines, and of course we cannot forget what AI does to artists.

I'm also thinking about this specifically. I don't know if it matters, everyone and there mom are using generative ai and polluting the air + draining water. It is a WARM Janurary. Scratch may just be another grain of sand to the huge problem.

and taking water from wild animals, that's part of my take

Obsolescence

Somebuggy wrote:
Obsolescence wrote:
I noticed an announcement made recently that talks about Scratch implementing AI into the site, with a want to “use AI for good”.

This is a bit confusing to me because AI relies on so much processing power that it not only damages the environment, but also damages the lives of everyday people. RAM processors are going for $9,000+, a guy had his power shut off by Microsoft so they could power their own AI machines, and of course we cannot forget what AI does to artists.

I'm also thinking about this specifically. I don't know if it matters, everyone and there mom are using generative ai and polluting the air + draining water. It is a WARM Janurary. Scratch may just be another grain of sand to the huge problem.

Yeah, I agree. It's kind of a sad thing that the general population uses generative AI without really knowing the full effects. I can already vouch for the insane weather, too. It's not quite warm where I am, but the snowstorms are intense. Global warming caused by pollution is also said to create more violent weather patterns, no matter the temperature.

Another sad thing that could come from this is the fact that AI already clogs so many digital spaces, and I'd hate to see Scratch fall down a similar pipeline. AI slop is everywhere, and it feels like most art platforms are doing similar things with their ToS as well. It feels like there's maybe 1-2 websites now that I can say for certain will NOT use art for datasets. Though there's so many others that won't even tell you if your art is going to train AI.

Even if Scratch made the most ethical AI system ever (one that didn't steal art and code from datasets), the fact is that AI as a whole requires a lot of power to maintain. The idea of projects even partially made with AI being featured or on the front page just makes my stomach sink. I'm all for Scratchers getting help/hints with code so they can learn, but I worry that it will go too far or just not work as intended. I just feel like there's a better way to teach than using AI, as well.

Obsolescence

Za-Chary wrote:
Obsolescence wrote:
In what way is AI actually going to be used for “good” here?
It's a bit unclear at the moment, but based on what we know, the Scratch Team is planning to add a “Creative Learning Assistant” that will help users code in the Scratch editor. As far as I can tell, it's not really coding a project for a user; it's more so offering hints/tips on what to try next.

Za-Chary wrote:
Obsolescence wrote:
I do not want my projects stolen so people can generate art similar to mine without a creative thought.
In particular, Scratch has stated that they do not plan to implement any sort of AI image generating feature.

So from the sounds of this, Scratch is making something similar to the Gemini AI Assistant from Google?
I still have some mixed feelings about this if it is the case, but I am really hoping that projects will not be generated in a similar manner to AI-generated images or AI “art”. While I get the intent isn't to entirely create a project for scratchers, my worry is that the AI will not work as intended. To my knowledge, AI in any form doesn't have the best track record, which is why I am a bit worried.

BitcoinFarmer

A big difference is that remixing is non commercial but ais can be commercial and sell the works based off what they were trained with

Last edited by BitcoinFarmer (Jan. 23, 2026 09:22:10)

--PAW--PAW--PAW--

Obsolescence wrote:
I noticed an announcement made recently that talks about Scratch implementing AI into the site, with a want to “use AI for good”.

This is a bit confusing to me because AI relies on so much processing power that it not only damages the environment, but also damages the lives of everyday people. RAM processors are going for $9,000+, a guy had his power shut off by Microsoft so they could power their own AI machines, and of course we cannot forget what AI does to artists.

In what way is AI actually going to be used for “good” here?
I do not want my projects stolen so people can generate art similar to mine without a creative thought.

“But what about the remix feature? Doesn't that already generate copies of your projects?”
If a person does use the remix feature on my projects, the site automatically credits the original project.
If someone uses AI to generate a project based on something I spent hours making, I am likely not getting any credit.

I've used Scratch as an art platform for years, and if it is going to be using people's art for their AI dataset, then I am probably better off unsharing a majority of my projects. Even if I do that, would the projects still be used for AI even if unshared?

I think this is really bad that it’s happening even if it’s “for the better” I like scratch but one of the reasons is it gives credit if you remix a protectbut ai doesn’t

Obsolescence

BitcoinFarmer wrote:
A big difference is that remixing is non commercial but ais can be commercial and sell the works based off what they were trained with

Exactly. While I don't think Scratch intends to use our project data for commercial AI, the very idea that AI is going to be involved with the site in the first place just sort of rubs me the wrong way. Remixes, while they aren't flawless, are still made by humans at the end of the day. The whole purpose of a remix is for scratchers to learn and get inspiration off of each other when they are done as intended (and not used just to make copies of projects without any changes).

With AI's involvement, it is encouraging the idea to pretty much skip that step of any human interaction. It's just sad coming from a site that encouraged people to collaborate and be creative. With just the mentioned “AI Assistant” Scratch wants to make, thousands of tutorial projects on how to code or make certain things will become obsolete.

Plus, commercialism from AI is another can of worms. Remixes at least have human soul behind them, but it is clear they shouldn't be commercial because they contain content made by multiple scratchers. AI is an amalgamation of things also created by people, and with that logic, it also shouldn't be commercial. Yet the fact companies, online platforms, etc. are all turning to AI and making what is essentially stolen content commercial is just.. something I don't even have the words for. There really is no shame.

Obsolescence

--PAW--PAW--PAW-- wrote:
I think this is really bad that it’s happening even if it’s “for the better” I like scratch but one of the reasons is it gives credit if you remix a protectbut ai doesn’t

I agree. It also seems that Scratch doesn't plan for its AI to generate art and projects on the site, but the fact our information and project data was taken with little warning seems a little unethical. There isn't even an option to opt out of our projects being used for datasets, either. Even the “AI Assistant” they plan on making will also make tons of tutorial projects obsolete.

EScratchsaurus147

To be honest I'm SCARED. And before you reply saying something like “Well there's no reason to be scared”, let me at least tell you WHY I'm scared:

First, I've heard that the ST is using our art to train AI in art. A lot of people (like me) don't really make our own sprites very often, instead, we UPLOAD sprites (like a gen 5 Pokémon sprite for example). People usually credit the sources of these images in the notes and credits. (EX: Pokémon showdown for the mankey sprite.) But the AI might NOT credit where it got trained, to me it REALLY sounds like art theft, which is 100% ILLEGALL.

Second, I've also heard that the AI can even see your UNSHARED projects, which i feel like should be YOUR personal private stuff, i don't even think the ST should be allowed to see it (unless they're the projects of someone who got banned).

Finally, AI just kind of creeps me out. The only AI i ever use is google AI overview.

EScratchsaurus147

Obsolescence wrote:
--PAW--PAW--PAW-- wrote:
I think this is really bad that it’s happening even if it’s “for the better” I like scratch but one of the reasons is it gives credit if you remix a protectbut ai doesn’t

I agree. It also seems that Scratch doesn't plan for its AI to generate art and projects on the site, but the fact our information and project data was taken with little warning seems a little unethical. There isn't even an option to opt out of our projects being used for datasets, either. Even the “AI Assistant” they plan on making will also make tons of tutorial projects obsolete.

Yeah i feel like an option to opt out would be VERY understandable, but yet it isn't there.

Obsolescence

EScratchsaurus147 wrote:
To be honest I'm SCARED. And before you reply saying something like “Well there's no reason to be scared”, let me at least tell you WHY I'm scared:

First, I've heard that the ST is using our art to train AI in art. A lot of people (like me) don't really make our own sprites very often, instead, we UPLOAD sprites (like a gen 5 Pokémon sprite for example). People usually credit the sources of these images in the notes and credits. (EX: Pokémon showdown for the mankey sprite.) But the AI might NOT credit where it got trained, to me it REALLY sounds like art theft, which is 100% ILLEGALL.

Second, I've also heard that the AI can even see your UNSHARED projects, which i feel like should be YOUR personal private stuff, i don't even think the ST should be allowed to see it (unless they're the projects of someone who got banned).

Finally, AI just kind of creeps me out. The only AI i ever use is google AI overview.

It's completely reasonable to be scared by this. This worries me, too. Plus, you are absolutely right about AI not giving credit.
Ideally, AI shouldn't be trained off of any copyrighted material, and especially not creative projects made by kids. Nobody really got any warning on the site apart from the notification asking to accept the new ToS. Because you had to check “yes” to use the site, a lot of people gave their permission to use their projects for data training without actually knowing. That said, AI thrives off theft in general. Even if Scratch does not intend for generative AI or AI “art”, they still found a slimy way of “asking” for our consent to use our projects for data sets. Even if a person were to read the ToS, it pretty much boils down to “comply with getting your work stolen for AI training or don't use the platform at all”. While our projects might be on shaky grounds when it comes to how legal this all is, anything generated using copyright is definitely not legal as far as I know.

The unshared projects thing really creeps me out, too. I have a few unshared projects I use as a private canvas for my vector artworks, and now all of the vector assets I have created are probably now in an AI dataset with nothing I can really do about it. The weirdest part is that the ToS is very unclear about if unshared projects are included in this new policy or not. Though I hope that simply unsharing takes these projects out of any AI training or datasets used.

EScratchsaurus147 wrote:
Obsolescence wrote:
--PAW--PAW--PAW-- wrote:
I think this is really bad that it’s happening even if it’s “for the better” I like scratch but one of the reasons is it gives credit if you remix a protectbut ai doesn’t

I agree. It also seems that Scratch doesn't plan for its AI to generate art and projects on the site, but the fact our information and project data was taken with little warning seems a little unethical. There isn't even an option to opt out of our projects being used for datasets, either. Even the “AI Assistant” they plan on making will also make tons of tutorial projects obsolete.
Yeah i feel like an option to opt out would be VERY understandable, but yet it isn't there.

This, too. We won't truly know what they intend to do with our data once Scratch actually uses it. While they can state their intentions, I find that actions often speak louder than words. That's what worries me most. Nobody has much of an idea what an “AI Assistant” on Scratch truly means for the site. Nor do we know what else they plan to do with our data. It's a really scary time for the site, and a major red flag that they are basically forcing permission without any way to opt out (apart from maybe deleting projects altogether).

--PAW--PAW--PAW--

Obsolescence wrote:
EScratchsaurus147 wrote:
To be honest I'm SCARED. And before you reply saying something like “Well there's no reason to be scared”, let me at least tell you WHY I'm scared:

First, I've heard that the ST is using our art to train AI in art. A lot of people (like me) don't really make our own sprites very often, instead, we UPLOAD sprites (like a gen 5 Pokémon sprite for example). People usually credit the sources of these images in the notes and credits. (EX: Pokémon showdown for the mankey sprite.) But the AI might NOT credit where it got trained, to me it REALLY sounds like art theft, which is 100% ILLEGALL.

Second, I've also heard that the AI can even see your UNSHARED projects, which i feel like should be YOUR personal private stuff, i don't even think the ST should be allowed to see it (unless they're the projects of someone who got banned).

Finally, AI just kind of creeps me out. The only AI i ever use is google AI overview.

It's completely reasonable to be scared by this. This worries me, too. Plus, you are absolutely right about AI not giving credit.
Ideally, AI shouldn't be trained off of any copyrighted material, and especially not creative projects made by kids. Nobody really got any warning on the site apart from the notification asking to accept the new ToS. Because you had to check “yes” to use the site, a lot of people gave their permission to use their projects for data training without actually knowing. That said, AI thrives off theft in general. Even if Scratch does not intend for generative AI or AI “art”, they still found a slimy way of “asking” for our consent to use our projects for data sets. Even if a person were to read the ToS, it pretty much boils down to “comply with getting your work stolen for AI training or don't use the platform at all”. While our projects might be on shaky grounds when it comes to how legal this all is, anything generated using copyright is definitely not legal as far as I know.

The unshared projects thing really creeps me out, too. I have a few unshared projects I use as a private canvas for my vector artworks, and now all of the vector assets I have created are probably now in an AI dataset with nothing I can really do about it. The weirdest part is that the ToS is very unclear about if unshared projects are included in this new policy or not. Though I hope that simply unsharing takes these projects out of any AI training or datasets used.

EScratchsaurus147 wrote:
Obsolescence wrote:
--PAW--PAW--PAW-- wrote:
I think this is really bad that it’s happening even if it’s “for the better” I like scratch but one of the reasons is it gives credit if you remix a protectbut ai doesn’t

I agree. It also seems that Scratch doesn't plan for its AI to generate art and projects on the site, but the fact our information and project data was taken with little warning seems a little unethical. There isn't even an option to opt out of our projects being used for datasets, either. Even the “AI Assistant” they plan on making will also make tons of tutorial projects obsolete.
Yeah i feel like an option to opt out would be VERY understandable, but yet it isn't there.

This, too. We won't truly know what they intend to do with our data once Scratch actually uses it. While they can state their intentions, I find that actions often speak louder than words. That's what worries me most. Nobody has much of an idea what an “AI Assistant” on Scratch truly means for the site. Nor do we know what else they plan to do with our data. It's a really scary time for the site, and a major red flag that they are basically forcing permission without any way to opt out (apart from maybe deleting projects altogether).

Also for some of the older scratchers like me old account @LBPodderpool didn’t agree to this when we agreed to the tos so they shouldn’t youse content from those people let alone anyone else

mingo-gag

Listen, they made a Response about the AI

D-ScratchNinja

redspacecat wrote:
Za-Chary wrote:
In particular, Scratch has stated that they do not plan to implement any sort of AI image generating feature.
The new ToS wrote:
The Service may permit users to Submit Input to the Service in order to generate responses, images, recommended software edits, or other AI-generated output (“Output”). “Output” and “Input” are collectively “AI Content”

Just because it says that they may generate images with AI doesn't mean they will. They just state that in case, uh, the agent can generate diagrams or something.

--PAW--PAW--PAW-- wrote:
Obsolescence wrote:
“But what about the remix feature? Doesn't that already generate copies of your projects?”
If a person does use the remix feature on my projects, the site automatically credits the original project.
If someone uses AI to generate a project based on something I spent hours making, I am likely not getting any credit.
I think this is really bad that it’s happening even if it’s “for the better” I like scratch but one of the reasons is it gives credit if you remix a protectbut ai doesn’t

I'm not an expert, but I don't think that an LLM could recreate one person's entire work such that attribution would be necessary for the responses—it could take thousands of texts about the same topic for it to be capable of predicting what to say about it. Now, if the agent gets more specific information by searching for a project for you like how Microsoft Copilot searches Bing, then it should be showing you the source.

Obsolescence

mingo-gag wrote:
Listen, they made a Response about the AI

Oh, dang. How long ago was this made?

It sounds like, based on what they are saying in this response, that:
1.) Our data is not being used for datasets or to train AI models, as any planned AI for scratch isn't even made yet.
2.) Scratch intends to listen to the community regarding the topic of AI, as to (hopefully) not turn the platform into AI slop.

While I get this is all stated mostly after scratchers shared their opinions on this topic, why is it that they wanted our data in the first place? AI aside, it's still super strange for Scratch to hang onto the data of its users without an option to opt out still.

Apart from that, I am glad that our stuff is seemingly not being used to train AI (at least, right now). The only issue I have is that they still remain vague about what a scratcher's data means in this context. From the wording, it does sound like they won't be using any identifiable information (thank goodness), but there's no clear picture of whether or not scratcher data includes a scratcher's projects. If they don't consider projects the same thing as scratcher's data, things could still get kinda bad. If they do consider scratch projects part of a scratcher's data, then we might be okay. Regardless, they definitely need to work on making the ToS clearer, especially when it comes to the topic of AI and how it will be used. I think the response here is a good step in the right direction, though.

cookedasparagus8

Obsolescence wrote:
mingo-gag wrote:
Listen, they made a Response about the AI
Oh, dang. How long ago was this made? -snip-

It was most likely made today, as the update was yesterday.
They’ve seen the backlash.

Discuss Scratch