Raw LLM Responses

okay, playing devil's advocate here: i wouldn't go so far to say these things hold no value for references whatsoever. that said, i don't use them because i find the way they obtain their training data to be morally reprehensible. these tools are good at one thing and one thing only, which is the big picture. sure, they mess up the details, but at first glance the image looks perfectly fine. and that's exactly what i want from a reference image. see, i'm decent at details but on a bigger scale i'm really, really shit. and in my experience, details are a lot easier to get references for than bigger picture stuff, mostly because style and the actual "topic" of the image start mattering a lot more on that scale. so where do you get a reference image that includes several specific subjects without including any actual artistic creativity? that's right, a soulless machine that tries to reduce the very concept of art to numbers. i'd have an image that helps me with the one thing i struggle most with and it'd be objectively useless for anything else. the perfect reference image. so if these companies could *please* stop stealing literally everything they can get their hands on and pretending machine learning is even anywhere close to actual intelligence i'd greatly appreciate it as i might actually be able to use the tools in the way they're intended on a technical level.