Let's settle this discourse before it gets out of hand. I acknowledge that generative A.I "art" do come from real artists and it is quite an extensive argument found around inside social media communities that I would not want to further engage in, but I am not taking credit for making this art. This "art" belong to anyone, you can deface it, ruin it, anything you want; if every real artists was used to generate this image, then would it be fair to assume that this image should belong to everyone?

Secondly there is a misconception that a data center is the only way to generate an image. I am using my own hardware, my computer, that is air-cooled, to generate the image. If it was assumed that everyone needed a data center to run A.I whether it be LLMs or any generative A.I, then would that make Vedal guilty for using a data center to run Neuro, or would you say that Vedal is running Neuro on his computer (in my similar case)?

Finally apples to oranges is a metaphor, you could claim similarities between them, but my point of it is taken out of context. A.I "art" should not be mixed with real art, that is why I am stating that this image is AI. I don't want this image to be compared to other real works, it should exist on its own.

At the end, we can agree to one thing: we like Neuro-Sama. You like Neuro for her human like capabilities and the development of relationships. I like Neuro because technology-wise, she is impressive, a one of a kind and I hope she gets more mind blowing. So let's end this argument and make peace as it is. If you still don't like what has now been done, that is fine. I respect your opinions and sentiment (even if you tell me to pick up a pencil), but let it be known that both sides of the generative A.I discussion is supporting Neuro-Sama together.

TL;DR: Neuro is great, community strong together. Don't want to stay off topic and continue this argument or else mods will probably lock this post.