Raw LLM Responses

So many of the arguments these people make so blatantly come from a place of utter ignorance. I have to wonder how much of it they actually believe, and how much of it is just desperate flailing for justification. I've spent years of my life creating art, and I've also spent some time learning how to write an effective LLM image prompt (posting none of the results publicly). I can tell you with absolute certainty that _generating LLM images is absolutely, completely different to creating an image yourself._ The process is completely different, the mindset is completely different, and the results are completely different. Creating art is like building a world from scratch in Minecraft, in creative mode. Every part of that world is thought through, deliberately placed, and informed by your understanding of what your world should be. Generating LLM imagery is like using the old custom world generation menu. You can tweak those settings to as close a representation as possible of the world you have in mind, but ultimately, the results are random. It _might_ be _almost_ exactly what you're after. But it's still based on randomness, and there's no understanding informing anything - only pure, mindless logic. So it will never be exactly what you had in mind. That's not a creative process. If I wanted the number 21, I would get out a piece of paper and a pen, and write the number 21 on it. A self-proclaimed "AI artist" would get out a d20 and roll it again and again until it said 20, and say "that's close enough." Because that's the most his "medium" of choice would allow. That is the fundamental difference between art and LLM-generated imagery that the tech's defenders don't appear to understand. You can't draw the comparisons between the two that they try to draw. The two processes are so completely and utterly different that the comparisons make no sense whatsoever. If they ever spent any time trying to learn how to draw, they'd see that immediately.