Raw LLM Responses

It feels dishonestly framed that the best arguments for AI art use are the ones that got the least time in the video. Your points aren't indefensible, you don't need to do that and addressing things honestly makes your arguments stronger for it. The absolute biggest use case/ argument for AI art is the tool/ accessibility argument (not in explicit terms of disability-usage). There are a lot of people who have concepts that they want to see brought to life, but don't have the skill to make themselves. Using AI + minor editing is substantially easier than learning how/ developing the skills to make actually good art, and it isn't realistic to impose that every person who wants to see a specific idea for something like a character concept either needs to get good or pay an artist to make it for them. That is very much so a self-serving, gatekeeping stance to have. It isn't to say that that's entirely harmless - there definitely are commission artists who otherwise would have had work from those people, but the scale of products just isn't comparable for that to be honest (you can throw dozens of concepts/prompt tweaks at AI trying to see the look of different things in the matter of hours, when commissioning even a fraction of that work could easily take weeks and substantially more resources from the customer.) It isn't fair to assume that most people have the kind of resources necessary to properly source all of that, and this is where the progressive language is applicable - expecting people to have those resources if they want to be able to see their ideas made real is a very privileged position. It also isn't a zero-sum game - I've commissioned 2 different characters that I had originally "created" using AI tools, and I never would have fallen in love with those characters in a way that made me want to get them commissioned if it hadn't been for the AI generator that led me to them to begin with. Because I don't have anywhere near the kind of free money to throw at artists to help me through that kind of discovery (which is understandable - what I want would be a LOT of work for an actual artist, and they need to be compensated appropriately for that) The fact of the matter is that generative AI art lets people who are otherwise skill-incapable still get to see their ideas brought to life to decent quality in a way that is substantially more realistic for them than other avenues. There are other, serious arguments against AI generation (the biggest of which imo being when companies think it's acceptable to blatantly *replace* currently working artists with AI), but this video (as well as most others who aren't explicitly defending AI) approaches this topic with a very strictly persecutory stance where the personal objective of "eliminate AI generators" creates an atmosphere where of being unwilling to acknowledge that there actually are any legitimate arguments for them. And I think that just isn't representative of reality of a notable % of people who are using this stuff and why they are