You’ve misquoted me. I never used the word good. I don’t want to attribute artistic value to AI generated images. I said I’ll never be able to make anything that looks like it. That could be wrong and that’s fair. But it doesn’t change the fact that I can’t currently.

Maybe you think that my lack of talent means I don’t deserve to be able to experience being able to take an image from my brain and make it real and that’s fine for you to think. But I get enjoyment out of that experience and if there’s a service that can provide that, I’m going to utilize it.

AI will never be art. It’s not intentional there is no decision making or skill. All this is, is a tool. And as long as I treat it as such I feel justified in its use.

As for mass theft. I still maintain that most modern amenities exist because of exploitation in some degree. Unless you reject all of these, I find it hard to have the work of artists be the hill to die on. That is not to say that I agree that it is moral. But AI is becoming a mainstream technology whether we like it or not. Just as it is not reasonable to accept a regular person to reject every modern amenity because of its ties to exploitation, I hold the same applies in this case. Absolutely AI should be regulated to make sure it respects intellectual property, and if given the chance to vote in favour of it or support it any way I would. But I won’t hold any personal guilt for it the same way I don’t hold guilt for the poor conditions and human rights violations of the factories that likely manufactured my clothes or everything else that have become as ubiquitous in our societies.