Raw LLM Responses

Cope. AI created a new creation, people liked it and copied the style, end of story. Is that wrong? No. But I love the irony when AI does the same, all of a sudden it's "stealing", "unoriginal", "hollow" and you hear "Make your own style", but not when analog artists do so, no sir. Is there a flood of badly created AI content on the internet? Yes. Do I wish I could filter AI creations out in image search at specific moments? Yes. I support AI, that doesn't mean I support everything that's happening within an infrastructure that clearly wasn't prepared to deal with a flood of AI art. Do I think regular artists should pound sand and scatter? No. But I am tired of the hypocrisy, the willful ignorance when it comes to how AI art works, and what it means as a concept, not the result of thousands of people churning out trash with a new tool with extremely low barrier of entry. There's plenty of very talented AI artists, some of those choose to mix the arts and elevate their creations by utilizing generous amounts of photoshop in the process. It's not required, some can create equal works without photoshop, but they have a freedom and fluidity in their process that's pretty unmatched when they are unrestrained by the AI creating their vision, and they can bridge the gap between the result and what they envision with photoshop, instead of doing dozens, hundreds or thousands of iterations until the result finally *clicks* with what they have in their mind and wish to unleash, and AI allows for that. Not to mention using it as a concept palette or getting inspiration by giving the AI freedom with an ambiguous prompt, creating dozens or hundreds of unique approaches to the same prompt, allowing a regular artist to take influences from what they like and create their own piece, like what has already been done from other art works, using line art from *this*, using colours from *that*, using models and perspective from *those*...