Raw LLM Responses

@janelantestaverde2018 your points are partially valid, coherent, but align with traditionalist views. you oversimplify by ignoring nuances in how tools and creativity evolve. "It is not a tool by the definition of tools." is debatable by semantics. Traditional definitions of a "tool" certainly include AI. "AI pictures are art. Somebody else's art." Strong in some parts, but not really absolute. Yes, AI outputs can be "art" by broad standards. "As for the person prompting the pictures, they are not an artist." is partially valid, especially for simplistic prompts, but overly rigid. "The only real comparison... is that it is like commissioning art." your core analogy, a quite valid parallel. "You merely describe it and do not take part in the actual process... Using AI to make pictures is just commissioning art from a program." largely yes, by emphasizing detachment. "Claiming physical ownership... but not of the process. You become the owner... the person or program who made it are the artist." solid, on ownership dynamics. your points are valid from a purist, human-centric perspective that prioritizes manual craft and originality, effectively challenging AI art's legitimacy by reducing it to outsourcing. However, it's not entirely bulletproof: it rigidifies definitions and undervalues prompting as creative labor. I stand in the middle, I understand both sides, but looking at things through a narrow lens isn't a good way to understand something. don't stick to the boundaries you create, be open to the nuances.