Raw LLM Responses

Also just wanted to leave a piece of my mind on some of the arguments presented in that vid as I go through it: 1 - Using an argument that because we describe art by words that somewhat relate to the artists is a bit of a silly thing to do, since the whole reason we do that is because our languages were shaped with no alternative to be seen. Generated video can also be both well and awfully directed, as much as a real video can be. You would use the exact same rhetoric in both cases if you would want to describe the thing in detail. 2 - Getting an emotional exchange through art ties back to my argument about ideas: what we relate to is an idea, not the execution. If a person has something to say and has a good enough skill to say it (either a good drawing technique or a good understanding of prompts or whatever) - the audience will get it and will emotionally resonate with the artist. And that's not even accounting for how most people don't even want to have "a conversation" with an artist, they simply don't care about such things (and that's not a bad thing, humans simply can't care about all the things other humans care about). (A note here about mononoke and how this guy said that AI version is better - he's hella capping, both detailed styles and simplistic ones have value to them, and one cannot say that one is objectively better than the other. I don't even like Gibly style and I say that. That AI art is also garbo, since the prompt for it probably was like "draw mononoke" and that's it. Like I said - idea is what matters) 3 - About a guy who Ai'ed his art - his original sketch wasn't good either though. I can't say anything about his coloring and lighting, which could potentially have some interesting elements to them, but there was nothing interesting or unique in his sketch, and definitely nothing interesting in his prompt to ai. That's why the end result is crap. All the while my artist friend himself sometimes shows me AI-assisted art that looks great, all because both the original sketch and instructions to the ai were interesting 4 - About how people "hate" AI art and asmongold is wrong about his advice - that's a really, really shaky argument. I personally hate those AI brainrot memes, but just look at how many people enjoy them. Look at how many web-sites use AI art now, and how most people don't really care that it's AI (that's if they even realize it's artificial, which becomes harder and harder to do, especially for not well-versed in art). Companies absolutely would not want to employ someone to create all the art when there is an alternative that is both faster and cost effective, even if the end result is a bit worse (something that majority of their clients won't even notice). You could argue about subconscious dislike for such things but that's only a matter of time when even crappy models with 3 word prompts are going to look decent enough. So no, I would say that asmongold's advice for people who are working as freelancers for those companies is actually true and somewhat useful. Artists with 200k followers on twitter and with a big enough fanbase on patreon don't have to fear anything for now though, but I can't say the same for the next generation of artists. 5 - AI videos on YT are garbo, and people still watch them in masses. Refer to Charlie's video on Diddy's case and those AI court-vids about this case, they are awful but those view counts are insane. The more quality of those videos rises the more people are not going to care if it's generated or not. 6 - This argument about generated Netflix show presumes that everything generated just comes out of nowhere. First of all, I do believe that people will gobble up a comedic show that has been generated based on their favorite comedies. It's not going to be popular culturally, but it's still going to be a thing, just like AI memes are now or even generic copy-paste comedies from 00's. Second of all - not all AI art is done the same, like I was arguing all this time. You absolutely can give detailed enough instructions that would reflect you original idea, it's just that those ideas and a drive to bother with all that is not that common. Which is once again true for both "real" and "artificial" art expression. Overall I would still say this: it does not matter to me through which means the artist has expressed themselves, what matters is their idea and how well it's conveyed though execution. Unimaginative slop has always existed, and it's true that we'll get more of it as more AI art becomes accessible, but it's essentially the same as music becoming more accessible to produce with FL studio or gaming industry with UE5: there will be a lot of people who "shouldn't" create anything who get to do so and they will produce slop, but there also is going to be a lot of people who express their imagination through those simplified means, which would've taken them a whole lot more resources if not for that simplification (and they might not have those resources available for one reason or another)