Raw LLM Responses

You're right, they'll never understand. Because they're not artists. They're lazy scavengers and thieves. They're chasing a quick buck. They want an easy way to game the system. Idk if they even think it's gonna last. When it fails they will be on to the next scam in droves. I'm hearing stories from artists who do conventions that even being too close to an AI booth tanks their sales. More and more shows are not allowing AI content. Some con attendees still don't see it or don't care, and buy anyway, sure. But it's seeming more and more that customers don't want it. I think that's a good sign. When your product is poisonous to an industry from the ground up, I don't think it will last long. Algorithms will always be around, and are fine. Helpful even. But this is a classic case of a thing not staying in its lane. Computers and whatnot are supposed to help us with work so we can have more time and mental power for things that are actually enjoyable. When they do that they're great. But there's always some scum who want to game the system and think any disruption is good and see this as an opportunity to skim off the top. They really think we're jealous, too that they found a loophole. We need to keep pushing for laws that would require consent prior to feeding our work into AI, and laws that would require AI companies to extract stolen data and remove it from the data pool, and update the pool to exclude use of that data and training. And also require them to pay the artists who do choose to allow their work to be used to train their model and every single time even a small portion is used. The only reason they get away with it is because law makers don't understand what they're looking at. Even though it's a huge inconvenience, we have to find time and money to pay for driver's licenses. So why should "but it's so hard and requires things of me that I super don't want to do!" be an excuse for these companies?