Raw LLM Responses

AI is a tool, and a person has a soul. Sure, I can agree with that. The thing is, to put in your soul into your art, you need to hold the tool and go through the process of creating it. It's the process that leaves the mark of your experience, skill, thought process, mistakes, quirks, preferences, marks that you don't even realize you've left, i.e, your personality or soul into the art and viewers can feel that, even if they don't know how to make art themselves. Offloading all your work to the tool doesn't mean it can translate whatever 'soul' you have. If it has any soul, it's the bastardized amalgamation of all the soulful artwork it fed on and blended inside it that's peeking out. And often time, that creates an abomination that seems like 'art' but is just a little bit off, that's why it has such an uncanny valley effect. Sure, someday it might get good enough to completely imitate a human, but that just means it'll become doppelganger that has already completely digested those souls. No matter how 'human' it seems, that's still a monster. That's why, if people find out a creative work has any amount of AI touch in it, it evokes either complete disinterest in the work or visceral backlash. That's just our survival instinct, an inherent defense mechanism that keeps us from trusting the monster that's trying to replace us. Also, corporations don't hire him('if' they do hire him and he isn't just faking it to cope) because they think think his art is 'original' or 'good' or something, but because he's cheap and fast and they don't have to pay the other workers that take time and create genuine artwork the money they deserve if they hire him.