Raw LLM Responses

@artman40 "Your first three debunkings had nothing to do with my list of uses. Like I said ". Generating works with style that would take absolutely enormous effort to create. You're aware that paying an artist to create 100 000 images by hand in a very elaborate art style is impossible."" Hi, I'm an artist and I draw daily, I'm aware how long it takes to hone skill and create things. If you're not willing to put in the effort, nor can you pay for it? Too bad. Sports cars sure are expensive, it'd be nice to just own one without paying for it or dedicating time to earning it. "And "That's illegal" is not an argument. It's a tool. Mashups without consent are also illegal. Yet it's frowned upon when the authors want them to be removed. Also, art styles can't be copyrighted. Problem with art styles is that a lot of people have very similar art styles. Not only that but they don't have a static art style and many have multiple different art styles." I don't see what your point is with "mash ups". It's not a tool when it does all the work for you. If I buy a stencil, put it against a canvas and spray that and don't do anything to it. Did I create anything? Or did the stencil do all the work? If I use the stencil as a grander part of the image? Something that's built upon with a variety of tools in skills- THEN it's a work of art. Hitting generate and sharing 'your' creation, isn't art, it's not creative and it's not a tool. It's a stencil that gets used once and "I made this" You ordered a burger at a restaurant but want to claim you made it- you didn't and it's no different with AI generated images. "Also, art styles can't be copyrighted." 1- Imagine if disney put out a cartoon that used DBZ eyes, that used exact hairstyles from characters. Even if Disney wasn't in legal trouble they'd be mocked by artists, non-artists and fans for being so blatant in copying. It's not a good look when you directly copy a style. 2- Tracing isn't illegal but it's heavily frowned upon to the point people will lose a lot of credit for doing such a shameful thing or their job. And it's real hard to recover form that kind of shame. 3- You know plagiarizing is because it's illegal, right? If you watched the video- that you found moot, you'd see that a lot of the AI art can be directly linked to specific pictures that it copied because it's 90% the exact, same image. That's illegal. That's not even a debate, it's not an argument. You do that and the person takes you to court? You lose. My favorite part is you're not even trying to take in the ethics of this. You know Vocaloids source singing from actual singers? That are paid for their work and know what their voice is being used for? Had the AI generators actually did this instead of doing what they're doing? I'd be 100% ok with it. But instead, our hard work is just being sourced with no payment and the best thing is you want to excuse it because it'd be expensive. But sure, you keep trying to tell an artist on how art works and the ethics around it and I'll be sure to take notes from someone who has no clue what they're talking about in terms of art or the legality of it.