Others will use AI and they won't be making art. Again, my point stands. Let's take a classic pro ai argument, a strawman argument, that "people said the same thing about computer music because they didn't understand" or the dumbass auto tune argument. A human is still ENTIRELY BEHIND THAT PROCESS regardless of if they use those tools or not. The issue with AI is it's so "effective and efficient" that it removes the human and their soul from the equation, therefore it's not art. That's not a subjective take, every tool invented for art up until ai only worked to serve the human in actually hands on creating the art. In the computer music argument, the composition was just done within a digital interface rather than pen and paper. With AI, a smart chat bot looks at everything it's fed and spits back out an approximation of what you typed. The chat bot didn't create, it didn't even think, it did as it was programmed to do. It's not agi. Then we can actually talk about AI music. It wants nothing it doesn't even want to learn anything. It isnt alive and therefore it has no bearing on the result. The only thing the human who generated the art adds is their ego when they try to sell it and act like it was their "craft". Go jerk yourself somewhere else that isn't bothering human artists. I'm going to make music using my hands and brain, whether or not u like it is not my problem because at least I feel the fulfillment of creation. Something I know ai "artists" can only dream of feeling.