Raw LLM Responses

I have little doubt that AI art will find its niche, in which it will compete human artists out of the business. And perhaps this niche will get ever larger too. Just an hour ago I watched a video by a guy who bemoans the state of art education in schools, worrying about how computers and AI are killing creativity. He illustrates his entire video with, er, AI-generated imagery. I think to such people as self-published authors of some kinds of children's books or online articles, AI art might well be a godsend; it is perfectly good for some low end illustration, editorial pictures and such, and thus, in those fields, human artists may well be losing chunks of their income. Similarly, AI-generated music will be a great boon to YouTubers who just want some pleasing background music for videos of nature (or of themselves demonstrating painting techniques!); in the past, they ran into endless copyright issues. So yes, maybe AI will replace a lot of human creativity in the professional sphere. But lucky for me, I don't make art just for "end users" to "consume." I make art as an exploration of the world, of shape and form and color and 3D space, of my own reaction to it, of my own thoughts and dreams. AI cannot help me with that, and thus, I mostly ignore it. I don't know if AI art will replace human artists in the professional field. But I don't think AI art will replace human artists any more than chess programs have replaced chess players, or helicopters have replaced people trudging up the slopes of Everest. People who think life is about "consuming" things are pretty sad, if you ask me. But I guess it depends on whether we are mostly result-focused, or mostly process-focused.