Raw LLM Responses

your argument on ownership is flawed, artists should have more right over their images nor, they should have right to digitized diffused data produced from their exact work, this is just another form of data to store properties of image, just like pixela or vectors. If we should base our societys' laws on something, it should be, and is, like you pointed out, amongs others - insentive to create, artists own their works, and another huuuuge insentive to not work, or create is free ability to take your work, and add it to the system. Many artists give their understanding to others when they get inspired by their work, because as humans we understand concepts depicted, and AI doesn't, it just corelates probability with word, it doesn't truly understand, because we relate those things to emotions, and experiences in our life. I understand that now someone might say "AI just does same thing as humans getting inspired" well, I just might add that AI analyzes more images than any of humans can in their lifetime, yet makes abysmal amount of mistakes, that no human would make. AND if we base law on morality, and insentive for work (thus productive society), then in my humble opinion, we definitely should expand rights of artists to their work, and how they are used. On top of that all, automatization of everything seems to be touching mostly creative and pleasant to do jobs, while everyone predicted that first the manual ones would be... this doesn't seem to be happening, we are driving towards dystopia, where everyone will depend on universal basic income, controlled by authoritarian rule (because they control your only stream of sustainability and power), because noone will have jobs, and as more will lose theirs, the less value will stay in available jobs. I know every new tech opens new jobs, but it always seeks to make cost lesser, thus less jobs in the end.