Raw LLM Responses

I will always hate AI artists selling generated art that uses mass searches to generate their art by "copying" the art of others. That said, I genuinely like the concept behind AI art, and like the idea of personally training an AI algorithm with your own art. I think AI generated art can provide wild and fantastical references for artists as well. It is frustrating that there is discourse about AI generated art not being called art when it is genuinely not much different than an musician using a synthesizer or sample in their music. Or even an person learning to draw using someone else's art as a reference. If someone copying your art does poorly, by it either not being well done or it being drawn in a style you dislike, do you criticize that person for their genuine attempt? Or do you attempt to nurture that learning by attempting to provide tips or simply by giving them encouragement? AI is currently in a very bad state, mostly because of the problem some artists face trying to get a job when AI art is more readily available. It is abhorrent that AI is used for the news. But AI will be here, because there are too many people that enjoy not having to type out their credit card numbers or dig through search engines to find the right song. It is helping humanity thrive in many aspects of our modern life, including some prevalent artists relying on AI to make corrections in their art with the push of a button. I will stand with my fellow artists in agreeing that losing jobs to AI is a very difficult thing to endure, and hopefully any business that endeavors to use AI art will have the respect to train their own AI generating algorithms. But I will still push to enlighten everyone of the potential of AI art, and believe in a future where it gains a more favorable reputation.