Raw LLM Responses

The problem with AI art is threefold. First of all, as another common mentioned, the fact that can create a lot of content really quickly means that not only does drown everyone else out, but it will eventually start learning on its own art and thus start cannibalizing itself and each other. Two is that when you ask broadly about people's concerns with AI they don't necessarily have a problem with AI creating things being used as a tool. The concern is that c-suit level people who only think about bottom lines want to replace all the humans with the AI. Which one are not good enough and won't be for like decades instead of hiring humans who are using AIs as part of their tool set, which would be the right thing to do both for AI and the human economy. And this is the reason why. For example, I say that people really actually like the metaverse like what the actual metaverse is. Everyone just do not want Mark zuckerberg's metaverse in the same way that people don't mind using AI as tools, but Google and Microsoft want to take their crappy versions of it and directly replace humans. Thus getting a subpar quality thing just because of some delusion that they'll have less employees and thus be able to send a monkey to Mars is absolutely infuriating. And third is, I think there would be less of a problem with AI art if the artist themselves were programmers. It's uncommon today but my favorite form of art is when the artist's new programming and programmed from scratch, the AI that would generate the artwork. So the actual artwork itself is not just the result, but the actual program that they built and would be showing side by side. The problem here is that everyone is not making their own AI models. They're just using chat GDP, pointing it in a direction and then having it take over from there, which is kind of the equivalent of grabbing a template image online, flipping all the colors and then hitting print on your printer.