Raw LLM Responses

The arguments you make are valid, but your examples are very selective in many cases. For instance: It is very easy to find AI art with faults, but (now) it is also easy to find AI which has no significant faults. The latest models get text right and the situation with hands has improved so that most of the time they're accurate. Using AI art for reference is admittedly crazy. However, I have found AI can be quite good for inspiration (composition ideas, colour palettes etc.). The digital art you do is probably very similar to your traditional methods. However, for years digital artists have been using digital 'cheats' (warp and liquify tools, re-sizing selections, adding textures, adjusting colour tones, contrast and detail, creating depth of field, using filters, actions and camera presets, photobashing etc.). There was no outcry over that. The accessibility argument re. disabled artists is insulting. However, AI does allow people who cannot draw (or think they can't) to produce outcomes that give them pleasure. In a small proportion of cases, this may encourage them to take an interest in learning traditional art techniques. AI art is NOT going to go away, although some current platforms will probably disappear. It's a bit like search engines - years ago there were quite a lot of options, now Google dominates. I can see the same thing happening with AI art. AI will (probably soon) be everywhere - art, customer service, medical diagnosis, driving, design, writing, film-making, manufacture, video games etc. It is here to stay and we have to cope with the issues that will bring, but there are benefits as well.