Raw LLM Responses

I can't imagine any scenario in which AI doesn't almost completely replace a large portion of graphic design work. Virtually every business that can replace graphic designers will replace them. They already don't want to pay artists. Everyone I've seen who says otherwise has based their opinion on the *current* state of AI. This is like someone in 1900 saying phonographs don't sound good enough to really take off. I'm sure things will go differently with businesses where the artwork itself is key to their success like comics, animated films, visual effects, prop and set design, etc. In those cases, I think you're exactly right and AI will be simply another tool for now. But consider book cover designs. Most are already garbage based entirely on trends with little effort put into them. Each genre has a standard cover and virtually every book sticks to that standard. AI was made for this sort of thing. It's perfect. If the desired result is just a near copy of what's trending, why pay someone when you can press a button? Of course trends have to start somewhere and at least for the time being, I think they'll start with human artists. Publishers promoting big name writers might still pay artists, but everyone else will press the button and the results will be nearly identical to what they would have paid a person to do. In the same way, Larry's Refrigerator Repair Shop isn't going to pay someone to design a logo anymore. That's already happening. A big, multi-billion dollar brand might still hire designers almost as a sort of prestige thing and to push creative boundaries, but even they will use AI to save as much money as possible. I also think people are underestimating the potential complexity of AI. I think it'll one day mimic creativity itself in a way indistinguishable from human creativity. Everyone thinks I'm nuts when I say that, but I see no reason it won't or couldn't happen. It's the exact thing they're trying to accomplish and I think they're going to succeed. Eventually, AI will not be the clay. It'll be the sculptor. I think there will come a day when nobody, not even professional artists, can consistently spot the difference between AI generated art and human artwork. And this is just the very, very beginning. Decades from now, you'll be able to just say "A bank heist comedy film set in 1960s Vienna directed by Quentin Tarantino starring Marlon Brando and Pee Wee Herman" and it'll actually happen. And it'll be a guaranteed 3 star script if you sign up for the plus package. I can also imagine a backlash happening similar to the resurgence in popularity of vinyl records. As the world becomes more and more "fake," some portion of people will crave what they consider authenticity. I bet one day, for example, there will be comic book publishers whose whole selling point is that they don't use AI. And, like analog recordings, nobody will actually be able to tell the difference between the analog and the digital. I think there will always be a place for high art. With some styles of art like expressionism, the fact that it was made by a human being is essential to the style itself. The stuff that "looks like my 5 year old painted it" could of course be done by AI, but the whole point is to express an emotional reality. I think there will always be room for the human hand in art, if only for philosophical and emotional reasons. As I said before about a backlash, perhaps we might even see a wider appreciation of "real" art that currently isn't even appreciated by a majority of people. I'm probably being overly optimistic. The more I think about it, the more I think artists should already be embracing and promoting a new art movement. Something like primitivism and naïve art that focuses on the philosophical virtues of human creativity and emotional expression and explicitly promotes the idea of everyone and anyone creating "serious" art with whatever talent or lack thereof they may possess. Creating things with one's own hands satisfies an emotional need. Appreciating the efforts of a flesh and blood artist satisfies an emotional need, too, I think. Perhaps this should be the focus. Without a concerted effort by artists and educators to promote a new philosophy to counter the AI revolution, I think we'll see AI replace not just graphic design, but human creativity itself eventually. I think there will always be people with a compulsion to use their hands to create things, but the art world can't rely on a trickle of prodigies. All that said, I still think graphic design specifically is on the way out no matter what. Commercial art at the press of a button is just what the people with the money have always wanted. The overwhelming feeling I have about AI is that this is just the beginning and people are vastly underestimating the effects it will have on all aspects of human experience. The entire point of a tool is that it eases or replaces human labor. The logical conclusion of technology itself is that it will render humans obsolete in every objective, measurable way. The only question is whether this will result in utopia or extinction. tl;dr: I don't care if this is too long or if you don't read it