Raw LLM Responses

I usually avoid commenting because the comments section quite often on any individual channel is usually just an echo chamber (I know that sounds negative but it is entirely understandable that like minded individuals will group together) but I would like to point out IMO there is no such thing as an artists style, there are art styles that an artist may choose to use or has a penchant for but the style is not inherently theirs (In fact part of the fair use laws addresses this as making the style only usable by a single entity would be detrimental to society). And using a term such as "ghibli style" is more a reference to the style that artist most commonly uses as opposed to saying that style is "theirs". I do agree that using "stolen" art for training data is ethically wrong and should be looked at by the legal system however anything an artist puts out as publicly viewable is of course going to be used as inspiration or referenced. Whether an individual person or an AI uses it as reference seems a moot point to me, the artists skills are of course unquestioned, however if you do not like an image because of its appearance that is one thing, but if you do not like an image because it was generated by AI that is being petulant. As in there is nothing wrong with the image itself but you dislike the source, this is similar to liking MJ's music but then after the controversies of his life being exposed deciding to no longer like it. And I mean this as having a genuine dislike of the music as opposed to boycotting something for moral reasons, granted a genuine dislike could arise from the associated feelings with having the after knowledge. I wont argue that the artists are wrong and AI is right but the three biggest points of anti AI is that a) The "big companies" are profiting off other peoples work with no compensation, b) There is no skill involved, and c) The market is being flooded with slop devaluing an artists skill. For the first argument I can agree to an extent but it seems like you and many others are attacking the AI/"AI artists" rather then attacking the "big companies", that is how it appears but please do correct me if I am wrong. Both point B and C seem to contradict each other to a degree, there is certainly a lot of AI being uploaded but if it is "slop" how is it devaluing truly impressive artistic works? I can understand the lack of visibility and this should be addressed (and has on several platforms) with a simple opt out of viewing AI work option as well as ensuring AI work is properly labeled. I should note I am not an artist but I am an AI hobbyist, I make images and do upload some but I am not looking for profit or trying to make a name for myself, I upload images in an effort to not be selfish as well as a hope of providing a muse like inspiration to actual artists, or in other words I just like to make images, I like to share, and hope they can/might be used as reference material. And this is another reason I often avoid commenting, because the moment I start I will just go on and on and on, the original reason I came to make a comment was in regards to what you said at 1:12:55ish, I mean no offence or insult but would love to see you make an impressive and liked image (that last point is important, it must be liked by others and not just yourself saying "It is good enough") using an AI image generator in 5 minutes alone and without any other assisted tools, no image modifying or correcting using photoshop or any other such tool. The number one comment by far in relation to disliked AI art is how the details are always wrong, the faces off, bad hands/fingers, incorrect lighting angles and so on, you mentioned several times throughout your video that you can easily correct this in mere moments by just asking the AI to do so and yet we see these same image issues/artifacts all the time, why is that? It is because asking the AI to fix something "can" work but will likely break or change other aspects of the image completely, requiring on average multiple attempts and requests to "get it right". To reduce the time and effort of "correcting" an image using just the AI itself requires an understanding of language, how AI works and perceives language as well as an understanding of the specific tools available within the program being used, these are all learned skills. I wont say it is a high skill ceiling typing in prompts for an image generator but if you spend any amount of time actually doing it you will find there is a learning curve and anything with a learning curve implies that there is some skill involved. I would actually argue there is a large amount of language skills required in prompting, do you understand the differences you get from using the prompt "dog" as opposed to "canine"? The AI can very easily misinterpret your intentions using the word canine and instead give the subject larger teeth or incisors, look up any word in the dictionary and you will find they almost always have 2-3 separate meanings depending on context and AI is not the best at context...yet. Ultimately I do believe a person who has put in long hours of effort in learning to draw/animate/design should expect compensation for the use of their publicized and for sale work, but if your image or work is uploaded/displayed not behind a paywall but as publicly viewable material then it is free to be used as reference or inspiration, by anyone, however they choose. (Congratulations to anyone that actually read through that entire garbled mess, truly for such attention, patience and respect you deserve something)