Raw LLM Responses

Bob Ross, lemme explain, in good faith... There's a difference between "adapting to future", and "AI stealing someone else's work". Because that it is - it's a theft. You create some work, and because AI doesn't think for itself, it needs to harvest data to create the output - what data? Well, others' data. Do they give permission to give their data? No. But it's not about surveillance, it's also about copy-right - if I write a book, and I give my heart and soul; blood, sweat and tears, into it - and than AI takes a bit from it, and than a bit from another book, to create its "own output", than, it is literally just stealing my work. Cuz that's how it works (it generates words/pixels, depending on its input). That is quite literally plagiarism, and as an artist, I'd be frustrated... Another example - there was a study that showed that many new studies are generated by Chat GPT (as usually, it generates one specific word, and people noticed that new studies use that word more frequently). That could be a problem, as while AI can be great, it can also be wrong. Imagine that new studies, about medicine and useful architecture, will be AI generated - that could potentially harm real-life people... And so, I want AI to automate our jobs, so that people don't have to work so hard, and necessary commodities will become rights for free (like food, energies, etc...). However arts? Where you put your soul and emotions, that AI will never be able to have and give (only replicate), that should only and only be reserved to humans!