Raw LLM Responses

AI never made art. It is wrong to call it AI "Art", because it is just generated by copying the very essence of real art it was fed with. Anyone claiming to copyright AI-slop never understood what they are doing. Not even overdrawn and corrected generated pictures are real art. I don't mind anyone doing that for themselves or to even post it >IF< they mark it as AI-images. Selling it is also something I completely reject because it is breaking the copyright of those artists from whom these models got their training data from. It is just straight up stealing in an abstract and indirect way. If you cannot create real art then you have to train and learn it. If someone generates images and calls them "their art" then they fundamentally don't understand what the word means and that the process is giving the piece it's worth. No matter how good or bad it looks. A great AI image can be liked, yes. But it should never be copyrighted, paid for or called art in any way. I think the world should see things in a grounded way instead of in extremes. There are AI images I like, but because of how respectless tech-bros are I always have this bad feeling of liking it because it doesn't deserve to be liked. If everybody would just be honest and not claim anything what is not theirs then it would be so much easier for everybody. I still prefer real art and will only ever pay for real art. I therefore encourage to get paywalled AI-images from those "artists"/directors for free whenever you can if you want them. There is no moral problem here to circumvent payment for something digital and stolen.