General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If you support unions (DUers should) but still think it's OK to post AI slop, see the hundreds of Bluesky replies [View all]highplainsdem
(59,753 posts)terribly resentful/envious of them. I remember producer Rick Beato doing a video some time back about a young band he knew whose very promising first album was messed up by an interfering A&R man. The same thing can happen in all the arts. If the suits have made the decision to invest in talent - if spending a lot of money on that talent seemed like a good idea - then they should get the hell out of the artist's way. They shouldn't let either contempt toward the artist, or some stupid and egotistical idea that that they'll express their own artistic creativity through directing the artist's work, mess everything up. At least not if the artist is staying true to the type of work that led to the business investment in the first place, holding up their end of the bargain.
I saw representatives of the completely misnamed Big Tech lobbying group the "Chamber of Progress" on X a couple of years ago doing all they could to try to turn people against real artists who objected to their work having been stolen to train AI. Trying to make people view real artists as nasty elite "gatekeepers" who didn't want other people to become artists, which is the reverse of the truth. I saw one of these shills for the AI companies, a lawyer, whining that his parents hadn't bought him a guitar when he was young so he never had the chance to become a rock star that those privileged real musicians had (apparently he'd never heard of any real musicians whose families were poor). So that terribly discriminated-against lawyer and AI shill wanted all the unskilled wannabes to know they were being liberated by AI companies, now that AI tools could instantly let them become musicians, visual artists and writers. I'm surprised they didn't have an AI version of We Shall Overcome for their liberation movement.