Raw LLM Responses

Is it horrid to say that my autistic ass managed to anthropomorphize AI as a child? As one of humanity's children if that makes sense? Like how when you feel sorry for a robot that's job is to handle explosives? If 'NEVER' shouldn't be applied to AI then I imagine, without the moral and ethical debacle of livelihoods lost and basic respect taken away, in the future we'd pack bond with AI pretty easily, or at least let them fade into the background. Mainstream media of old always portrays AI as evil, acting in malice, but evil is a human thing. An animal has instincts to survive, it is only evil because we project our emotions onto something that could not choose not to follow it's instincts or orders. As more developments emerge it's always the ones wielding the AI in question doing more dubious harm. The existential questions of AI will always remain, undoubtedly so, but the moral and ethical weight of it really just mucks the water doesn't it? There is danger in thinking in this techno-utopian terms, I know, there are livelihoods threatened today, tomorrow and eternally because of automation and such. There are so many existential questions with no easy answers. But those are our human/god/creator minds and societies working our way through the existential responsibilities of being human/gods/creators. I blame capitalism totally for creating the battlegrounds which makes moral and ethical conundrums like this just pop up like weeds in every turn. Even back when automated machine looms was used in industry it didn't extinguish the value of creating cloth from start to finish, it made clothing cheaper and less burdensome, but it did force workers to lose their jobs, their wages, their daily bread just because The Big Boss wanted bigger, faster bucks. The justified reactionary anger of back then is repeated now. To me it's because those in power impose something so absolutely world-changing without our consent, without our preparation, without our input on how we would want it to be or how we would like it to impact us. Really, there is no fear of losing livelihoods if all livelihoods are promised. There is no fear of losing respect if respect is assumed and promised outright. This is a tangent, absolutely. This philosophy of mine isn't one of answers. But if it comforts anyone, feeling doomed isn't the answer either. If you're reading this, then there's more faith to be found if you keep scrolling and reading. I personally recommend a comment written by creator he he. They wrote - "to automate human expression to me seems like a truly pointless endeavor." and I agree wholeheartedly. That comment is a banger from start to finish. We as humans fundamentally put value in effort. Our mortality and limited capacity impose it on us. There are people, artists, who delineate AI generated art from human made art just from effort and joy and connection. If we care about the livelihoods of artists then we do too. There are three parties in a dialogue when an art piece is made: the creator, the art, the viewer. There is no conversation to be had if the creator is machine. If the creator didn't make the art out of a conscious desire to express. Our lizard brains love looking at impressive, perfect things but our monkey brains know it's worth less than if a human with years of experience made it. We won't ever stop making art just because art can now be generated effortlessly, the tradition of art will always be part of us. The first human in space coincides with the first art made in space after all. I just ask we chin up collectively. Keep the fire burning. Keep fighting. Just know that humankind isn't inherently doomed.