Raw LLM Responses

Hate how this is constantly framed as a "both sides" thing. The answer is no, it's immoral and wrong because it's straight up theft. AI tech bros try to dress it up and use buzzwords and fancy language to disguise the fact, but that doesn't change the truth. You can say machine learning, algorithms, stable diffusion, whatever. It's obvious to anyone with eyes that several supposedly "original" AI generated images are 1 to 1 matches with STOLEN art under copyright and nonconsensually taken without permission from the original artist. Let's be very clear, the AI is not "making" anything. It is fundamentally different from when a human artist takes inspiration from others. When it completely fucks up hands with 6 fingers or weird flesh blobs of anatomy, why does it do that? It's because it literally doesn't know what a hand is. When it puts gibberish scribbles in the corner of its image, is it because the AI is being cute and wants to sign its work? No, it's because it doesn't know what a signature *is* and there are so many stolen pieces used to build it that it even tries to copy that despite people claiming that it's not entirely built on theft and deceit. To be clear, I don't think AI is inherently bad, it has uses. But the fact of the matter is everything it does right now is built off stealing the work of other artists and claiming it as original. And that is 100% unacceptable. The best analogy I have for it is imagining going to 2 baker's shops. You take 2 cakes (without paying the bakers btw), cut them in half, and then go "look everyone, look at this cake that I made myself. Look at what a good baker I am." Obviously people are going to look at that and call it bullshit for what it is. So then you do it with 5 bakers. 5 different Frankenstein cakes. What about 10? 100? A million? Maybe you, a human being can't cut a cake into a million pieces to splice together, but a computer can. But no matter how many cakes you mash together, you didn't bake anything. You didn't *do* jack shit. All you did was take other people's cakes that *they* made, took them and mashed it together to call your own. And most importantly, you didn't *create* anything. If those other bakers did not exist, your product, your "AI art piece" also would not exist without taking and stealing other people's product. That is what AI does. Without actual artists to steal from, AI has nothing to offer. It is the fundamental difference of a person going to a bakery, discovering they like the way a baker makes a cake, learning a recipe and then baking it themselves vs the scenario above. With human artists, even without access to other work, you can learn, you can create, you can conceptualize and think and understand *what a hand is*. You know that human hands usually have 5 fingers, even without having to consult and get inspiration from other artist's works. And everything all the AI proponents are trying to do is disguise and hide that fact, to treat it as if taking other people's work against their permission and putting it through a machine that hides the slices it steals is the same thing as a human being who can create, and that the obvious theft going on is okay then. It's actually very cut and dry and I'm tired of people pretending like it's some deep nuanced issue when it's not anywhere close to that right now.