Raw LLM Responses

I have set on many cases that I believe AI is a tool and should be used as such I believe that is long as it is clearly stated that it's ai it should not be attacked for existing. And part of this is because, if you punish people even when they tell you the truth then they're just not going to tell you the truth. I believe there would be a lot less outraged if you knew whether what you were looking at was AI or not just by looking at the description of the image. But I also feel like it should be broken down into more than just "this is ai" I want to know how extensive and how extensive the person's work was. So I can make a decision whether I want to support or engage with it based on the amount of effort the human put in to guide the AI. AKA how much the human use the AI as a tool versus how much they use the AI to just do the work. However all of that is built on the desire or assumption that there are regulations and rules in the side of AI that prevent the companies from doing things that are unethical or wrong against unwanted parties like artists this is not submit or agree to their art being used. Also I think the last thing I'll say. From my experience of touching generative AI when it comes to specifically art. . . I have learned that my vision of what I want is too complex for AI. There are always too many things that I don't like or want to be changed or want to be different in and eventually gets through so many iterations or changes or frustrations that I eventually just go find an artist to make it instead. . . People trying to defend the legitimacy of AI art don't understand the intricacies of true art because AI art can never truly replicate the originality of true art without going through countless iterations. . . Most of them don't have a vision, they just throw a prompt in and they are happy with what comes out