Raw LLM Responses

The thing is, generative ai is inheretly useless and design to replace real human artist with a machine made from stolen content. It has been proven that pretty much all the use generative ai systems are trained from these real human artists. And yes, its true artists grow by imitating and "copying" other artist (i have some base on this part as i have a degree in fine arts), you HAVE to learn from others to learn to do your own thing, HOWEVER, the difference here is 1 is a machine that perfectly copies and pops out a sort of frankenstain amalgamation of stolen pieces, and the other is a inheretly flaw human who constantly makes mistakes and learns from them. Do people still copy and trace other people's work? yes, and thats plagiarism and will and is not considered any better than ai. When people like lavendertowne ""whine"" and complain about the ai issue, they arent refearing to ai as a concept, but specifically the generative ai aspect. There is literally no reason for generative ai to exist, things like Deepfake, midjourney and such have only caused harm, both to the enviroment and to people (not to mention the whole shitshow going with ai chatbots and people quite literally going through phsycosis) No one is ignoring other issues at hand like corporate greed and abuse, it the same reason things like writers strike became such a huge thing, because it only didnt report againts ai use, but the abusive treatment corporates were trying to do at the time with its writers. And regarding your point of these companies like midjourney having a clause where they threaten users if they abuse their system. Thats not really doing any preventing, how is this gonna prevent people abusing the system considering most people dont even read said clauses. Yes, there is a responsability to be have as a user with these type of stuff, but the company/product also has its own responsability to manage its product and what it produces. Look for example at people using midjourney and other generative ai to create CP or disgusting nsfw content, a "oh no dont do that or we'll sue you" really means nothing in how horribly ai is managed and controlled. Ai models have been known to steal content from nintendo, disney etc, and (from what i know is currently ongoing) they have sued these model/companies againts this kind of copyright infringment. And sure, big companies like this have the ability to sue for these infringments, but what about small artists who already get feked over by companies and what not? The reason "ai bros" fight back isnt because we scream at the "wrong culprits", but because 90% of these people who support ai dont really understand the extend of the issue when it comes to ai "art". Ive seen countless of arguments like "it makes it more accesible for people" or "ai art is the same as artists referencing" All in all, ai should be used for jobs dangerous for people or things people just dont wanna do (like example, mining stuff, things that involve radiative or harmfull things to humans) (Btw, sorry for any grammar mistakes i might have, and also im not writting all this from anger or annoyance, this is just my opinion and many in the art comunity)