Raw LLM Responses

​@scarletredblood If you actually credited every piece that formed your artistic style and vision you would be crediting thousands of people on every piece, you learned from thousands if not tens or hundreds of thousands of different pieces to gain the ability to draw, even if you don't even draw well. You don't even consciously remember everything you saw that informed your perception of what art is. Just like AI except AI does it with billions of images instead, but the scale does not change the principle. The idea that you would need consent to learn from other's work (not just art) is not only ludicrous but also dystopian, like having to pay a licence to Marvel to learn how to draw in a comic book style or pay a fine for unlicensed learning. the whole soul and emotion debate is just cope, you can't actually tell if a piece has soul or was made by a machine by being given only the image as context, as evidenced by all the times AI art was confused for human art and all the other times human art was confused for AI art. I don't call most AI art prompters artists, although it can become an art form when done by creative and knowledgeable people who use more complex tools to force the AI to produce a specific result they have in mind rather than exploring it's outputs randomly. Why would someone interested in the result, ie. interested in the image itself need to pick up a pencil or commission an artist if automated tools can make the image ? Just to support the art industry ? Why stop at artists ? should someone interested in going from point A to point B not be allowed to drive there to support the taxi industry ? Hell what about the horse and carriage industry ? Should autonomous cars be illegal ? At the end of the day it comes to requiring people by force to give artists money when they would have been happier getting the same result for a fraction of the price, it's welfare with extra steps.