Raw LLM Responses

The problem with the "you're just typing in a sentence, no different from Google" argument is that it only works if you only consider the bare minimum. Like, yeah, if you just type in "bunny with a suit" or something like that, then you're obviously not doing anything that creative. But what if they literally typed in a thousand words worth of description? Would writing three pages worth of description really still not make them a creative? I like to think of it like movie directors: a director who does the bare minimum, letting the writers, actors, prop designers, etc do all the work with minimum input can't really be called the creative sort; but it's already well known that a good director can make an amazing film, because they actually have A vision, and they're trying to do everything and their power to realize that vision. I of course recognizing that that comparing it what you do is a false analogy, but I feel like it's still important to bring up your characterization of AI art is overly simplistic. There could even be an argument to be made as to how relevant what one types is to the quality of the output, and how that contributes to the value of the images, but that is completely sidesteped in your argument. Which is sad, since why we make and value art is ultimately at the core of the whole topic, and the actually imported questions to answer, but very few people are interested in it. This is a legitimately nuanced complex topic, and you act as tho it isn't.