Raw LLM Responses

But she's not criticizing people using AI as part of a greater process, nor is she concerned about that when she poisons data? She's concerned with the people using AI generation as the bulk of the work. I used AI to generate logos for me because I couldn't think of ideas, then I redrew a logo inspired off of those from scratch and made it my own. I think most artists would say that's either fine or gray area. The problem is with people simply "Cleaning up" ai images and just using them for serious commercial purposes when it's trained off of copywritten work. If you're only contributing to the image by fixing issues, you're still stealing. If you make a game that's a copy of another game and introduce bugs, but then fix the bugs, you didn't make a new game, you fixed a copy. It's not crying, it's literally concerns of theft. If you can't see that I genuinely think you're not really hearing people out and just putting all the complaints down to something simple that's easy to understand and dispute for you. It's not elitism. It's not people crying because AI exists and artists are using it. It's people upset that companies and grifters are using the AI as an artist and cutting out jobs for real artists, and shortcutting the process of learning that makes good art that people enjoy. It is being annoyed that we are cutting out art and creativity and replacing it with slop. If you feel attacked when I say that, then you're not doing art with AI you're using AI as art. Nobody actually confident they're creating something would be upset about this.