Raw LLM Responses

AI doesn't make art more accessible, it makes art harder to access as it floods the market with a flawed product. From a business standpoint, the value of bulk material is and should be incredibly low as it requires less effort and materials to produce compared to human art. You can see this with, say, the pricing of an easily breakable plastic gardening chair from a mold vs a hand crafted chair carved from wood that will last for years. The problem is that when an unregulated market contains so many plastic chairs it becomes extremely rare to find a real wooden chair, let alone commision a woodcarver if you want to. Additionally, in this scenario, the plastic chairs are obviously overpriced because their overwhelming presence can hold the market hostage, and if you want to make your own from a mold then you have to pay a subscription fee to the molding machine's owner. Add onto this the fact that the plastic molds themselves contain various designs stolen directly from the wooden chairs made by humans, and you might see how this would result in a lawsuit if only lawmakers weren't so slow and large companies weren't trying to pay off judges to try out the grift for themselves. AI image generation is a grift, from top to bottom. The only person who deserves to truly be paid in this scenario is the programmer, and even then they should be subject to a class action lawsuit for using stolen material in their product and selling it forward onto buyers.