Raw LLM Responses

@TerryAVanguard That's kind of the problem though, people who use Ai art aren't actually creating anything. You may get results that are unconventional, but it's not aesthetic material that has artistic intent or invokes a specific kind of meaning. Creating art is a process that involves making consecutive choices and decisions, which is not really something you are doing when typing in a series of prompts. Even discussions involving "style" is often misunderstood as an aesthetic appeal, when in reality we are talking about the visual representation of someone's artistic experience and knowledge. No one has to be good at art to be an artist, but you at least have to do the work to be an artist. Ai art is antithetical to this idea, since all you are doing is feeding other people's work into an algorithm. The promise of Ai art democratizing creativity seems like a trojan horse to me. The prospect of ai generated art is promising at first until, like everyone's personal information, people's art work is fed into the corporate machine, which generally answers to no one. This will stratify class issues even further as artists become displaced, and make start of entry even more difficult for new professional artists. The reality is that ai art enthusiasts are asking us for permission to automate the human soul. It's not the idea of it existing that's the problem, it's the economic system that it's built under that is the problem, which brings me back to my initial (arguably unproductive) comment. Like with everything in our capitalist economic system, the people this will benefit the most are people who do not actually like art. The willingness for people to exploit the work of existing artists this early on, and the overall lack of respect around such issues by ai enthusiasts already establishes very obvious ethical issues involved with the technology.