Raw LLM Responses

I'm supportive of the tech because it legitimately has the *_potential_* to become a useful tool for actual artists, but i'm not supportive of how it's used. Poisoning one's own art is totally fair game, because it should not be taken without permission in the first place. If it slows down the progress so be it, but the artists gotta get their money when their art is used. The audacity of OpenAI calling it abuse... when they are stealing material from artists and not paying them. Even if most people who are against AI have no clue how it works (no, it doesn't copy paste or mix & match anything), taking someone's data as art without consent is still data theft (not the legal term) and an infringement upon their creative ideas _at best._ As for the cost effectiveness, you can't really look at arbitrary and unnecessary greedy sub plans and call it a cost of AI. This is an abuse done by the corporations. It'd be like having to pay $5 everytime you want to open a blank page on photoshop and saying digital art is too expensive, that's not exactly a truthful claim. On the flipside i'm also not in the slightest convinced that AI will replace the job of artist and render it obsolete at any point. Nevermind the fact that AI will never be able to compete on true creativity, because even if it did, people who still want the novelty of using/owning hand made art won't stop existing at any point. That's why a game like cuphead can make its full hand drawn using old school technique art a selling point, even though it's not necessarily the most efficient approach, it's an authenticity that people seek. Same reason some will travel across the world to buy some traditionally made good made by japanese craftsmen or such, even though you can get stuff just or nearly just as good, made quickly for cheap, the process inherently adds value to artistry. Ironically, the job of programmer, those who are making AIs, is far more under threat than artists.