Field-Derpzy

I think it somehow didn't went through

Look. Let me clarify again. I don't know If you really read or not.

I use AI art sometimes, but not for profit. Only for studying colorings and shadings and making seamless textures (Such as sandy gravels or watercolor-ey splashed papers).

Some movie makers also use AI to generate rotoscope filter-y looking clips (Such as moving paintings or 'high on weed' kind of filters), as long as they credit the ones who actually shot the movie scenes.

The part where I don't agree AI art is a big no, is because people are using them to steal people's art and put USD prices on the AI generated versions.

1, that's art theft because the generated version literally wiped out the actual artist's signature, and worse they claim it as their own. And people who have checked out the actual artist's works, will get some 'I think I've seen this somewhere' vibes, even though the signature is removed or smudged.

2, there are big possibilities the generator will steal their private internet database, whether from the photo being thrown to the generator or the database belong to the guy.

I don't say people like you don't have a future.

I'm saying you could've use your typing abilities to create a far more genuine works instead of AI art, then profit on those.

You could've aim your writing and typing skills for writing stories, tabletop campaigns, poems, and again, coding on videogames. Because literature and coding is also art. And that's more original than making AI art out of stealing then profitting of people's works.

There are some Garry's mod games doesn't have original assets or they use assets made by other people. But I see that's some pretty not soulless art, because there are some game systems that looks original and fun to play, all the result of some guy's creative idea of coding (Like dodge ball games of throwing grenade balls, or SCPs and Sonic in a maze).