Raw LLM Responses

Indeed - I think of it like this, if a computer resolves a million complex equations in a microsecond nobody bats an eyelid, that's what they're designed to do. If a person could do that you'd be stunned...conversely if a computer produces "art" that at surface glance looks amazing it's no more impressive than it simply resolving countless random equations in a heartbeat. A computer producing art doesn't impress me because there's nothing invested in it. Take a guy like Bill Watterson, his emotion for the characters he created brings something to the art, those little comic strips were a labour of love and it adds a sentimental value for the creator and fans, as a kid I'd read the strips and laugh but as an adult I often think of Bill creating them, the process, what inspired that particular strip, the love and care he took when drawing his characters, his devotion to them and how he valued his integrity over commercialism and merchandise, it's about more than cute drawings and words on some paper. If a computer made those strips they might stil be funny or even thought provoking but they'd lose that spark, I wouldn't see those comics in the same way, I might enjoy them but I think they'd be less endearing because the intent and motivations are not from a place of human emotion or desire...there'd be no depth or humanity to it. I'd rather spend the rest of my life churning out mediocre cartoons and comic strips than have a gallery filled with AI artworks. Guys like Watterson can do more with ink on paper than any computer can do with the latest processor, maxed our RAM and the fastest, most advanced GPU ever could, I don't understand why there are people out there who don't seem to get this concept.