Raw LLM Responses

​@Ashlet69​ Actually, they are real Ai. If you take physicalism to be true, then human consciousness is just a more complex version of what Ai does. There really isn't some "divine" difference between us and the machines. To say that Ai "copies" art while humans get "inspired", is giving us a bit too much credit. You seem to seethe about Ai lacking intent, and that "art" without intent isn't art, so ai can't make art. This is an incredibly dumb viewpoint, since Ai does have intent, if we humans have it. By intent, I assume (correct me if I'm wrong) that it's a determination to do something. Humans are like Ai, contrary to popular belief, since we don't have free will. Our personality is a result of genes and the environment we grow up in. Ai is the result of what hardware it's being used on, and how good it's training was. Either we AND Ai have intent, or none of us have it. If beauty isn't a necessary component of art, and that rather it's actually intent or meaning, you're just a deontologist theist or something. >Ai is soulless and unhuman or something As if there is a higher axiology than the phenomenological states of pain and pleasure GEEEEG Kantians need to chill In a later reply you said something along the lines of "you chose to be unhuman" as if there's free will, and you're pretending that creativity is more important than pleasure which normal people (not petty human artists) derive from ai art. Creativity is only important insofar it provides us pleasure our relieves our pain. Cut the deontologist crap and get on my level 😂