Raw LLM Responses

So what i am learning over and over again are that youtube artists do not understand what or how generative AI works or the legal ramifications of AI. Etc. It's nor your fault. A lot of programmers and computer science people do not understand it either. There are points here that I feel need to be refuted 1. Not all artist dislike generative AI and some professional artist do use it in their workflow. They are the minority and most are corporate artists but that has more to do with the bandwagon mentality. I don't feel most artists actually give generative AI a chance. I myself am neither pro or anti AI. But If I do anything but bash on AI the comments section will come down on me calling me a AI shill etc. Even though I personally don't use AI in my art for various reasons. Even though I've gotten feedback from Professional artists to use AI to finish art faster From AAA game studios and Movie studios etc. 2. AI is going to take away some jobs. Not all. It sucks but even without AI a lot of jobs in the industry come and go. This is normal in the game industry and had nothing to do with AI and hiring AI engineers is a normal thing since that covers a wide range of things not just art. Corporate art has value because of the IP. AI art by definition has no copyright. So no artist jobs are not going away. If you are an artist creating IP you are probably good. If you are an Artist that is using existing IP you might be in trouble but that may or may not be a bad thing since a lot of places are short-staffed. 3. The ethics of AI is not all that different from any artist learning by watching how other artists do stuff. The difference between AI and Humans when it comes to Generative AI is that humans will try new things but Generative AI can't do that since that is not the model it's using but in 4-5 years it too will start innovating as people try different models. We wouldn't have a problem if a person did it but because it's AI and most people don't understand it they get defensive and scared and react irrationally. I started out with an engineering background and I used deeplearning for my experiment before pursuing art so I know that what it is doing is not stealing my art. That is not how it works. It's no different from an artist studying the masters. A lot of artists do this and when doing it you look at tons and tons of paintings to learn how artists did stuff. 4. Art didn't distance itself from realism because of photography. Some art distanced itself from realism towards stylized but some artists still do realistic art. Matte painting is a thing for example. Not to mention an entire style arose because of cameras called hyperrealism. But also stylized art precedes photography. 5 Art has not stayed the same. where the artist deliberately pics color and puts its one stroke at a time. Even before digital art if you did manga or comics you might buy premade screen tone and add it to your scene. even now using premade backgrounds elements is a common practice. But a lot of good artists have all sorts of unintentional things in their art be it digital or traditional art. I mean Bob Ross used to talk about happy little accidents. Either Art is a hobby in which case it is about the creative process. Or its a commodity in which case it's about making money and in that case the creative bit is nice but at the end of the day its about cash. If someone misrepresents that's bad but if someone makes money using AI art I don't really have a problem, The reality is that If I can't make something better than AI it's on me to work harder than to rail on AI taking my job. Especially since AI art isn't copyright which means its art is fungible. I couldn't create a new idea that had value over sometthan that anyone can copy. The simple fact that you can't copyright an AI character/AI art means that artists will be required. Side note scripted stuff is a thing. Movies, TV, music. Its still valuable and entertaining.