I find it weird that people seem to argue almost exclusively over the economics of generative AI. I'd say around half of these panels are just variations of the same "it promotes economic trends which I find unacceptable" thesis.

My personal opinion on the matter, which is that any art is made meaningful by the person behind it, is basically only touched upon in the last two frames. I mean be honest, why on earth would we need some ugly piece of crap failing at imitating something aesthetically pleasing, when we could have unique styles shaped by personal experience and art that's actually thought over to look coherent in some way even if it may lack that detail that AI is obsessed with for some reason.