Raw LLM Responses

the ironic part about ai """artists""" is that they go out of their way to mock, bully, and out right harass artists for simply just existing and then have the audacity to act like they're the one's who are appressed. literally the embodiment of hypocrisy and projection. they want their "art" to be valued the same way as normal art while also saying that the very art they train from and use is trash compared to the ai slop they call soul, however in a sense they're not entirely wrong for saying ai "art" has soul but they part of the soul ai "art" has is the grinded up husks of the souls of real artists and nothing more, no essence, no life, only the fragments of what the exterior use to be when it belonged to someone who served actual purpose. everything in the world of ai "art" will be unique in a way however, nothing will be truly new. the thing is that it's not the end of the world if someone just wanted to generate a picture to see what their cat looks like as a person or just wanted to test it out for the sake of testing it out, the problem becomes apparent when you use ai art to replace actual "art", use it for scams, and or use it to harass other people. to anyone who uses ai "art" for those purposes: you're not replacing artists, you're replacing their pay check because ai "art" as a concept would not exist without real peoples' art work for the ai models to fed and scrap off of. many of these ai "artists" use to be crypto bro's just seeking out for some quick cash only jumping on the ai "art" train because it could be possible for them to profit off of it. it's easy to say that ai art will revolutionize art when you were never part of the art community prior to the creation of ai "art" generators. if ai "art" was really that much better than real art, why would they have to convince people that it's better? when ever ai artists see people defending their art with glaze and nightshade to poison it, ai artists try desperately to prevent other people from using it by saying it doesn't actually work and that it only makes your art look worse without it actually being protected by ai data scrapers and saying that those who say it does work are people who spread "misinformation". the funny thing about that is the fact I never saw any reliable sources stating that it doesn't work, in fact the only sources that state their claims are from the very people that are trying to prevent others from using glaze or nightshade and have no actual evidence it doesn't work. the other sources that are from the people who actually work on the ai models themselves say that ai is currently trying to deal with glaze and nightshade stating that not even blur filters work on the ladder. I haven't even found a single reliable source that states that glaze doesn't have an effect nor have I seen one that states that ai has a way to bypass glaze in any significant way. the ai bubble has shown similarities to other trends that weren't to stable like crypto currency, NFT's, etc. while ai "art" would be considered far more useful than NFT's will ever hope to be, but let's be honest that's not a high bar, the ai bubble has shown countless signs that it will collapse eventually sooner or later. (sorry for the yap but hey that's just my thoughts on the whole ai "art" community)