Raw LLM Responses

Generative AI models do have a place in the world, that place just isn't in art. But you see, AI "Art" _is_ solving a problem, it's just not a "problem" they would ever say out loud. Massive corporations want to have highly rendered looking art without having to pay artists. Generative AI can make thousands upon thousands of images for a fraction of the cost. And so, in the interest of letting shareholders buy more yachts per year, generative AI is unfortunately here to stay. The only semi-valid use of generative AI images would be for hyper-specific scenarios where an individual needs marketing materials for their own personal products and can't afford to commission a real artist. In those cases, using free AI image generation can be useful as stock images really don't cut it for that. But the thing is, the moment that individual is making money from their products, they can now afford to pay a real artist and so the situation would need to be for something that doesn't make money right away or at all. Books are a great example. Authors don't make any money until their book is published but first time authors need to be promoting their book long before actually publishing it so that it actually sells after publishing it. It also can't just be any author, it would only be valid for authors where the promotional/marketing material for their book NEEDS personalized imagery to actually fit with their novel AND this author needs to be flat broke, like food stamps broke. So yes, in this one super-hyper-specific situation that's like 1-in-a-hundred-million, generative AI images can be helpful and I personally approve of its use there. Literally everywhere else though? nah, get it out of here.