/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6943199
consider AI. especially if it's not important.

>>6938199
a good chunk of artists are trying to force it, but this isn't something you can force in the long term.
you can't bully people away from using an obviously useful thing.

>The "industry" is just going to start filling up with tech bros that don't actually give a fuck about artistic integrity.
this is just extremely unlikely. you can see what a non skilled artist like shad does with AI. not much, that is.
pure prompters can take simple comission jobs, but they will always lack consistency and control.
you say it so easily,
>just let the tech bros take the jobs!
but it's just not realistic. before that happens, artists are going to fold and use it themselves.

>>6938199
i'm still waiting for the day for somebody to actually do that meme using one of these.

>>6935354
then just innovate.
why do you want the tool to innovate for you?

>>6935380
you sound like you're too autistic to understand how a discussion works.
i already said my piece before your last post.

and then you followed up with stating the obvious (that i'm stating my own opinions and beliefs) and this gem:
>b-b-but what the hell am i supposed to do with that?
how am i supposed to know? are YOU serious right now?

i get it, you don't want to be convinced.
it's just funny to see that when you get challenged on your beliefs, at the end you just hunker down when you can't continue the argument, both refusing to continue but also refusing to change your mind.
"you're just a shill so no point in listening to you!" - if that's all you have to say, then just filter me you're wasting both our time by interacting.