Raw LLM Responses

It is admirable that an AI developer is talking about the concerns of artists and adressing the legality issues of training data. However, how the training data is acquired has no impact on the main problem of artists in the long run. Whether the AI is trained on legaly obtained data or not, once it becomes capable of producing similar or higher quality content en masse, artists (or any sort of worker that produces a thought based product, this includes programmers as well) will be out of a source of income. Using AI to increase productivity would not make up for the loss as well, as the abundance it creates will ruin competition and pricing. This has already happened by the way, it will only get worse. A common answer to my point usually is "automatization always does this, industrial revolution did the same, dont be a luddite it is progress etc." True but there is a difference. When you automate a factory production, you cut out the worker not the producer, and you still need raw materials and costs involved with that to produce. There is still competition. When it comes to AI, the producer is being cut out not just the worker, it is replacing the entire factory. And also no raw materials are needed, so there is no cost to produce. Legal acquisition of training data is a start. But artists and similar thought oriented producers need other protections.