Raw LLM Responses

There is something else you are ignoring: Humans have done this kind of "theft" for hundreds of years. I created a world that is grimdark and has alien monsters in it. I tried to be as original as possible by not going on online and looking pictures that could make produce what is unoriginal. However I still did it. I was not consciously aware that the art had already existed, yet I made it almost word for word, concept to concept, eye to eye. If I had published it without having encountering that thing that already existed, I would be sued for copyright infringement. And others have done it fully aware of what they are doing, still call it art, are recognized as artists despite the fact they are doing it more blatantly than AI Art is doing it; copying and making tiny alterations and then claiming it as their own. And a Century or so ago, before we had Photography technology, Painters made very similar arguments, claiming that their livelihoods are being threatened by the technology that we all utilize today. Obviously we dismissed their worries, otherwise if we had not dismissed them, Painting would be the only way to capture on a canvass the image of a person. There are plenty of other examples of things we had in the past that were eventually being replaced, people that were being replaced made an obvious stink of it, and today it is clear we didn't see the problem. Cause if we did, then the replacements we utilize today would not exist. If you use Microsoft Paint or any digital software that allows you to paint on a computer, try telling me that its not the same as the current day problem with AI Art. You know it is the same. Digital paint replaced physical paint. If AI Art is not really art, then by you using digital paint to create art, are you really any different? You're not using real paint, you're not using a brush, you're using a mechanical device. If AI Art is theft, then so is all the other art replacements you all use today. And seriously, you can make something that someone else made and not even be aware of it. You can unknowingly, unintentionally steal or copy. And hell, lets say you made something that is 100% original, but then the next day someone else creates that thing and decides to copyright it. Both of you are under the belief you made it, it never existed before you made it. Who stole from who? In truth neither. Originality contrary to what many think is not as simple as they think. And yes, we do use references to create our works of art, and you can try to do deny it all you like, but AI does work the same way. What is the main reason that people dismiss? They're not human. So only humans can make genuine works of art? So should we ignore what apes and other animals have created an say "that isn't art" as well? They think differently than we do, they live differently than we do, and their idea of what makes sense doesn't make sense to us. If AI Art isn't art, then your art you made with a computer is also not art. I frankly think it is stupid to lay claim to what constitutes art and what doesn't. Art is in itself by its very concept SUBJECTIVE, not set in stone. And the only people trying to set it in stone are simply those terrified of being replaced or competed against, just like the painters they replaced.