Raw LLM Responses

I liked the story of penguins, who steal stones from the nests of other penguins, the stones that have the right size to make a penguin's nest, instead of looking for them in nature. The video also highlights the legal issues related to intellectual property, and that those who use AI today have an advantage in terms of productivity over others, that this raises questions that will have to be decided legally... Or not, the future will tell us. I have seen graphic design schools that only allow the use of generative AI to start projects, not to finalize them, using AI assets in the final work is prohibited: everything must be "handmade" otherwise it is considered theft. These schools can have the speech they want to have, they are free to position themselves as they wish, and there is no consequence for them since they operate in isolation, they set their rules regardless of what really happens on the job market. This positioning is sometimes motivated by the desire to reassure about the seriousness of their teaching: not to join the "AI hype". When these schools find that this argument is not enough to stop their decline in terms of the number of students enrolled, it is a safe bet that they will embrace AI much more. Ideally, in 2025, we should learn to produce ALSO with AI, to combine the assets it generates, this in order to be competitive in the job market. If the goal is to be an artist who lives for his art, in this case old-fashioned techniques, without the contribution of AI, work. However, an artist recently told me that a company proudly displays that AI is only used to start projects, and that published works never contain AI. He then discovered that AI is used, but it is secret (anti-AI wave obliges). As soon as there is money at stake, all the existing tools are exploited, it is obvious. The question of intellectual property in this case, if the AI tools that are available are used but without being disclosed to the public? It's currently a mystery. In any case, the issue of productivity (the question of the quality/cost ratio of the products that young graduates create) remains. It's very good to do everything "the old way", but is it still viable in 2025? It reminds me a little that during the 80s, the artists who vectorized photos when this technique was still confidential and unkown. Was it cheating? It was above all pulling out of the game, in an already competitive sector at the time.