Raw LLM Responses

I hate that ai like this coasts on the ideas of what they could ideally be rather than what they objectively and currently are. Those who push it bet on an image of a high tech future which is ultimately fictional, at least at current, but is fed as a snake oil-esque lie of current or rapidly encroaching possibilty based on retro and neo futuristic concepts and predictions. These generative systems do not create work through inspirations, they create collages of data fed to them without understanding what that data should look like when pressed together and identify them through word association alone, something which humans dont. A generative ai struggles in producing "the vibe of x" without simply creating that thing it's been asked to imitate. It is genuinely remarkable what these systems are capable of in their ability to collect, catalogue, and filter mass sums of data (especially visual data), as well as recognize terms, ideas, and concepts when requested then produce a closely desired image reponse. Their ability to "learn" (not necessarily the same meaning as with a human) and it's implications for the development of robotics should in no way be understated, yet here there is a situation where, in regards to the issue of credit and theft, not only is credit for these works taken from it's "inspirations", it's also taken on a more direct level from _the ai algorithm itself and the teams who labored over it's creation._ Generative ai targets those clouded by fictional and dated images of the future in the same way hoverboards did, exploits those who devalue their own efforts, and hopes for a future where it will suddenly just... BECOME affordable and cheap enough to replace and further reduce labor costs in fields of creation where profit has become over emphasized, beyond quality. Sorry if this was convoluted and disjointed and has errors and bounces around i didn't sleep tonight and just yapped