This website contains age-restricted materials including nudity and explicit depictions of sexual activity.
By entering, you affirm that you are at least 18 years of age or the age of majority in the jurisdiction you are accessing the website from and you consent to viewing sexually explicit content.
The argument is that they are both simply tools. It’s completely wrong, but that’s what it is.
I understand the point of the argument, but as you say — it’s a false premise because only one of them is an art tool. The other is a faulty clip art machine that literally steals from artists.
I think the argument is that some people can’t afford a nice drawing tablet or drawing supplies, so all they have is a mouse that is “impossible” to draw with, and AI allows them to… “create”. source: bottom-left post in the image
Stick + lighter + stone surface = big dragon mommy milkers, just fine.
If you can’t afford a box of crayons and some paper, how the hell could you afford a computer?
Edit: by “you”, I’m of course referring to people who would make the argument. I know your reply wasn’t actually making the argument.
Even before generative AI I saw these arguments in music production that they had to pirate stuff because they couldn’t afford Serum/Abelton Live etc.
Never mind that there have been free digital music tools for decades now. Maybe a little clunkier but money has never been a barrier towards creating art.