Raw LLM Responses

@SOLACEISHERE Ask those artists to explain how the technology works, anybody who understands it would also understand the limitations. Everyone is in a panic without understanding AI can't replace artists, especially right now. There are two major points I would use for discussion. 1. AI doesn't copy, it learns. The computer "neural networks" are based on the mammalian neuronal structure, so it learns from reference like a person albeit in a very limited context and with limited applicability. It doesn't understand the artist's intentions or purpose. It's super fast at what it does, but is ultimately handicapped. 2. AI-generated art rarely looks finished upon generation and almost always requires extra painting from a human artist, or hours of in-painting, i.e. regenerating small portions of the painting. I make my own illustrations from scratch, but the AI-assisted paintings frequently take just as long, I'm talking 5+ hours for a finished piece. A talented artist could achieve amazing results with intelligent use of AI, that's why many successful artists are embracing the technology. Back into the 1800s, tailors destroyed sewing machines because they feared it would put them out of business. That's not the case at all and hand-made clothing demands a high premium. AI will not replace good artists. It might mean low skill artists need to improve if the want to compete. Art has never been a smart career decision, I've never expected to pay the bills with my art, I do it for the love of the process. The satisfaction of visualizing something in my mind and putting it on paper is priceless to me; if it doesn't pay the bills it doesn't affect me at all. If AI helps me realize my vision, it's a priceless tool