Raw LLM Responses

@anatoliyzhestov3915 I still believe the backlash would have been *way* smaller compared to what it is now as you'd have to still have a decent knowledge of the fundamentals of art to compose a piece from scratch into the digital canvas. You'd just not need to have physical hand-eye coordination anymore and instead could focus a lot more on the intentional details. Knowing how to draw or paint is so much more than being able to trace straight lines and perfect circles. The skills and knowledge that go into it would be almost just as translatable from digital to BCI as they were from traditional to digital. With AI, though? I still compare it to being a commisioner while the AI is the actual artists and you stand there as the mere """ideas guy""". If AI truly learns everything like a human then it stands to reason that the credit goes to it just like the credits of creation go to the artist who was commissioned. The only difference is that the AI for now can't consent to a transactional relationship with its user to give away the rights of ownership of the work. There's a reason Jason M. Allen wasn't allowed to copyright his AI generated piece and still isn't able too. And frankly? I believe the US Copyright Office made the right decision. The only thing I will admit is the artists' fault in this situation is that they tend to be terrible teachers. Like, reeeally terrible teachers 99% of the time. If this wasn't the case, we wouldn't have nearly as many desperate souls resorting to AI as a crutch for believing they don't have the "mythical talent" for it.