Raw LLM Responses

@jonesjeremiah It's not a good tool if it has to build upon a database of other artist, who did not have a say in their art used for this purpose. Until that gets resolved, I will have a problem with it. Also I have a problem with it being called art. That definition I'd like to leave for things people have build upon. Art is human, and a piece that comes directly from artificial intelligence, I'd rather call a drawing or a painting. To continue, there are lot of ownership issues, first of all, the copyright thing, this could be pulled for a moment, a couple of years, they can find merits to get rights to the training database. But that I said already, there's another problem with people owning it. I think if used sparingly, and if they build upon the pictures, it could be theirs, but if they only give a prompt, it's the AI's. For the photoshop, it's still manual labor, with the artist making the decisions. In AI it's more like you feed it a picture or material and it comes back done. I'm concerned for digital art in a sense, as ai will probably put a shadow on it. And I'm not against change, but I really don't get why a humane practice like art has to be taken for AI. And of it being from fear, I carry a bit of that too. We'll probably see people who don't give a shit about what art means calling it their art when they type three words on their computer. I fear art as a career will lose it's value, and people can't provide from a thing they love doing. Yes perhaps not visible in the near future, they're still things I wouldn't like to see happen. For me art should always mean something to the person doing it. But please I'd like to talk about this more, I'm always ready to hear of the other side to the problems I listed