Raw LLM Responses

Honestly I think the better comparison for AI vs Artist would be industrial pigments. Before we had industrial production of pigments, artists were limited to those who could mix their own paint. When industrial pigments became popular, they were just as reviled among artists as AI is today, because it suddenly threatened their livelihood by enabling people without rich patrons or inherited wealth to become artists. What happened? Graffiti art and portrait art became available to the masses, while the pigment-mixing artists reinvented themselves as a premium product. I think that's what's going to happen eventually here as well - AI dross filling the mass market with actual art being a premium product. Which is going to absolutely suck for the vast majority of artists who don't have the skills or ability to market themselves, or don't fit into the narrow upper crust idea of what an artist "looks like". Sadly, there is not enough of a market to support as many Stuart Semples as there are artists needing work. The enemy, as always, is not technology. It's capitalism. Also, RE luddites, while it is commonly used as a derisive term for 'anti-technology' people, the original luddites were the followers of a man (who may or may not have existed) called Ned Ludd. What did Ned Ludd's movement stand for? The protection of cottage business against the march of industrialisation. So next time someone calls you a luddite to try and shame you into rejecting advances in technology, raise your banner proud.