Raw LLM Responses

It's discussions like these that lose me. It's frustrating for me as a leftie with two master's degrees who isn't a fan of the trajectory of intellectual property or the conditions for artists, particularly those who aren't nepo babies. Of course human beings learn to draw by looking at millions of images, memorizing patterns, building muscle memory by tracing. Understanding doesn't exist. Consciousness itself is a pseudoscientific myth, drivel, and likely the kind of drivel that will be compared to space being ether, white supremacy, geocentrism, the flat earth, the four humours, and bloodletting with leaches. The very concept of human consciousness promotes barbarism and misunderstanding. This is a source of endless frustration for me as someone surrounded by artists. I went into all of this concerned about what the exploitation of capitalism might do with this technology and, every day, I'm drifting towards a pro-AI stance because I disagree with anti-AI advocates on topics like consciousness, intentionality, decision science, and creativity. And I don't think being good at art is any basis for someone to claim expertise in how creativity or consciousness work anymore than being a pizza chef makes someone an atomic physicist. Nearly everything that happens in our heads is a post-hoc lie our brain tells to justify a decision made by the meat in our skulls. This is partly why reader response theory (the author is dead) has weight because the author who claims to understand their process is lying and creative work is subject to analysis independent of the author's claims.