Raw LLM Responses

The greatest disconnect is how society sees art compared to how artists see art. The modern art comparison is very apropos when engaging with the public, art has become a joke to many people. You aren't going to convert he entire populace to have an artist's sensibilities. What they find value in is irrelevant to a large portion of people. So however legitimate your point of the intrinsic value of artists work may be, that doesn't in the end matter if it doesn't hold that value to the people consuming that product. The issue at hand is art as a commodity, you make a living by selling your work. That is where AI comes in, and many people are enjoying AI work. The only people who complain about AI tend to be artists or artist adjacent and unless you can make your living off of selling to that very small group you need to come up with some back up plans. The biggest hurdle is that artists seem to have difficulty understanding that once something is a commodity the intrinsic story becomes far less weighty, yes artist don't like Jackson Pollock but his taint on the image of art sill occurred nonetheless. Modern art did significant damage to the image of art and people frequently perceived art and by extensions artists as a fundamentally unserious discipline. When people criticized it people (other artists, art critics etc) came forward and talked about the subjectivity of art at the time that attitude directly fuels how people perceive AI art now. There is a direct line indicating deteriorating standards for art that led to this point where it is tacitly being accepted as art even though it was made by a computer. It is sad that people are paying for something in their field they never had anything do with or any chance to fight it.