Raw LLM Responses

I heard the other day a quote along the lines of "AI image generation is the worlds most expensive stock photo service" and I think that accurately reflects my views on what its useful for and where it's going to realistically go. I don't believe AI as it functions now will ever "take over" artists jobs, but I think in its attempts to do so it _has_ created an effective tool for creators to produce generic background footage. And once the stigma against using AI imagery fades away- in 20 years when everyone decides its low quality garbage- I expect it to appear in all the same places you'd see stock photos or images from google appearing today. Hell, its even being used for that purpose now. I remember seeing a video a few years ago covering a court case that used AI generated imagery. The human narrator talked about stuff happening and an AI generated image would appear displaying roughly that. I thought this was harmless for the most part, that it was AI was clearly disclaimed and it wasn't the focus, merely a visual aid. That, I think is the most effective place to use the "barrier of entry" argument. Given the size of the channel and frequency of the images it was clear an actual artist being hired was never a practical option. I think *that* usage, is not especially immoral or otherwise worthy of reproach. in my mind _that's_ ✨the future ✨ of AI imagery: Making the visual digestibility of the work of small content creators slightly higher. If I'm wrong to assume that's a harmless usage AI I'd love to be informed as to why in the replies. Excluding, of course, criticisms of openAI's practices. Were talking about usage of a product that not only is _going_ to exist- but already does, regardless of the moral issues with that.