Raw LLM Responses

I copied this comment from petapixel cause it's true "He still submitted something created by AI to a contest meant for humans. You can argue that enough work goes into using good prompts and fine-tuning the image, and that it still takes skill. However, a contest is meant to test a specific set of skills, and the skills needed to use AI well are not the same as actually creating an art piece yourself. It's like using a motorcycle in a marathon race. Sure, there are motorcycle races, but a footrace is meant to be done with feet. He tried to exploit the fact that AI art generation was new and that the rules hadn't caught up to it, attempting to use a 'motorcycle' in a 'footrace,' while acting smug about it. I've used AI art generation, and it IS tricky to use. I can get some nice results from it, and I have ZERO artistic ability. So, I can say from experience that making art with AI doesn't test the same skills as a traditional art contest. If someone wanted to create an AI category for art contests, that’s a valid idea. But if you seriously have AI make an art piece for you and submit it to a regular contest, you're simply cheating. Even if the rules haven't caught up, common sense should indicate that it's wrong. As for the copyright issue, that's a gray area in general. However, this guy absolutely deserves to lose his copyright for trying to exploit the technology and thinking he's clever, just because the judges weren't familiar enough with AI generation to recognize it during submission."