Raw LLM Responses

Network Engineer here who has been about 5 years in the IT segment. I would like to share my point of view on these arguments from a neutral point of view. 1. "Nightshade doesn't work." I looked at their Github project and flied over their python code (Clean Code is always cool) they wrote. The way they poison works is indeed interesting. But since this offense started from the artist corner there might be a counter offensive with tools detecting poisoned images. And then you got this code race with who is faster, the ones detecting the poisoned images or the poisoned images slowly corrupting the AI models.That's something only time will tell. 2. "Its not stealing, its inspired!" There is a clear difference between stealing and inspiration. If I go to someone who build for example a car that runs on a nuclear engine, I can get inspired and say "I want to create planes with nuclear engines" or "I want to create cars that are powered with a small sun". As visible through the examples, I toke a part of someones creation because I think its useful and want to makes something better, faster or even expand it on different type of things etc. From there cooperation could start. Stealing on the other hand is just taking something you don't posses, for example a smartphone. Just because you found it, doesn't mean you can keep it without the approval of the owner. Some gen AI are getting fed with stolen artwork which is the same feeding a dog with stolen dog treats. Sure he can then do tricks and stuff, but it doesn't justify the stealing. 3. "You can take AI for reference." Looking at the current state of AI pictures, I wouldn't use them for reference. Because hands having 6 or more or less fingers, or things levitating for no reason and so on. Yet if AI improves with bought images or having the approval of the artist to use their pictures, this might change in the future. 4. "You're just afraid of tech." If someones afraid of tech they wouldn't be on the internet. 5. "AI is accessible." Haha, no. In the first look it might look like that, but then the paywall comes crashing down and if you don't have the money, well go away, we don't want broke people. With normal or digital art, you don't really need money, only if you want to go professional. So grab a pencil, a piece of paper and get creative. But that is then relating to every thing you can go professional. And bringing disabled person into that isn't cool, as seen in the video, they sure are able to draw too and some do a better job than me. (I tried drawing but it was just nothing for me in the end ^^") 6. "AI is inevitable." Yeah, every new tech thing is inevitable, right NFTs, Cloud Gaming, Windows Phone, Windows 10's auto update? Sure it might be integrated in everyone's life at a point, but not currently like this. 7. "AI is an art tool" I don't know if there is in the art segment an AI tool like Github Copilot but I can surely see possibilities where it could be used. For example, smoother lines, suggestions, smoothing in general, helping newbies with tutorials adjusted to them. Those are only brainstorm ideas that I thought on the spot. But generating art isn't a tool, that is an automation. Summary: How AI is currently implemented in the art segment, its quite bad. It only profits those who are waving those money bills and those who are giving it time and effort to create something that is in their mind, are just a resource for them to mine. In my opinion automating the art process is and was a step to the wrong direction. Yet I can see AI being a companion to you on your art journey to make it easier and bring more Quality of Life things. I hope that one day, we won't see AI as a threat or AI (currently companies) seeing artists as a source for the training of their AI models. Rather that we see AI as a little companion who just wants us to help with our work and every day life. What are your thoughts on it reader? Ask me, express your point of view, answer to one of my questions.