Raw LLM Responses

Okay, Sam. I had a 3 paragraph comment that I was about to post here, and I wrote it after watching only the first 2 minutes of this video. Then I said to myself, "Wait. Watch the vid, hear him out, then we can post it." I wanted you to know that your voice was heard, listened to, and it affected some change. This is not the same comment I started with at all. I am an artist ... have been for nearly 50 years. I'm of an age now where I am aware of how little time I have left on this Earth of ours, and so I am always looking for time saving tools. For my purposes, the AI word to image generators are wonderful. I use them, and will continue to do so. But I respected your voice enough to watch your whole vid. And I do see your point. I understand why you feel the way you do, and your points are good ones. I agree that the system should only have ever been an "Opt-In" system from the start. As you pointed out, it's too late now, the styles cannot be unlearned, but your point is still valid. I come from a viewpoint that complaining about a situation is unproductive, unless one can also produce a solution to the problem. So, having heard you, I pledge to never again add into my prompts any "in the style of" any living artist. I may use Monet, Rembrandt, DaVinci, etc. But I will not use anyone's style who has been alive within my lifetime, nor 75 years prior, to reduce stepping on anyone's copyright and affecting their livelihood, or that of their estate. I don't know what the real solution will be, but at least in this manner, I can help protect and respect our art community. This is the small solution I have managed to come up with. It's a start. Perhaps the "winner" of the AI race will be the next art AI to come out, whose developers use models that were "Opted In" legitimately. And perhaps the respect shown by that dev group will entice more artists to consent to using their art. And perhaps it can be set up to offer some small recompense per thousand uses of the artists' names in a manner similar to the way YT pays out, so that (for example) Greg Rutkowski could receive $50 per 1000 prompts that included his name. That future AI, that respectful AI, that as-yet imaginary AI, that one will be the one that emerges unscathed from the legal fallout for having done things correctly, and perhaps even gain some respect from the community, to the point that more artists will then Opt-In, and then something beautiful will emerge from all the ugly that has happened so far. Maybe Deviant Art can do that with their AI. Anyway, thanks for the clear, concise, logical explanation of your views. I sincerely hope it all works out for you, and future "art babies". Cheers.