Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 9828560" data-attributes="member: 20564">Just to play devil's advocate, but that makes a bunch of assumptions:1. It's all made from AI, and there are no human-created parts you want.  Say it's a single individual using AI for interior art for an otherwise solid project who can't affort to hire an artist for likely more than it will ever make?  (Note: I'd still skip it because of the ethics of the generative art model training, but since you were willing to use ChatGPT that doesn't seem to be a blockage.)2. That you want to invest the time it would take to do it.  Assuming it's just a few prompts to generate the same contents isn't necessarily true.3. Nor is assuming that what they did is obvious/intuitive -- if someone had a fresh idea but didn't have the skills to realize it and leaned on AI, you will turn down what they, the creator of the idea did, but are willing to steal their idea without compensation so you can generate it yourself in AI?  So it's still using AI, but now you're stealing a creator's vision and concept as well?  And that's "better"?Again, I have strong issues with the ethics of the training models of the art and LLM generative AIs.  But isn't  taking someone's ideas without compensation is equally as unethical as taking other things people have created without compensation.  Even if you justify it with "they used AI"?</blockquote>