True, this new tech is not going anywhere. And it is really amazing for certain applications. But the reason that AI is so good and looks the way it does is because it was trained on human made art. If it ends up putting most of these artists out of business, it would be a real shame not just for the artists and not just for all of us collectively, but it would be bad for AI as well.

AI is derivative by definition. We like our art to feel like it is fresh and relevant. Who will do that if all the artists go out of business because of AI? AI will only ever look basically how it is now until it’s trained on new art. That’s why it is important to have the conversation of compensating these artists. AI is generating a lot of money, and giving nothing to the artists and communities that they trained their models on. And if these communities are decimated by AI now, then these companies have killed the thing that they built their success on, and will have a hard time continuing to innovate without it.

Now, personally I don’t think there is a risk of AI “killing” the art industry. Artists don’t just make art to make money. There is value in the time taken. It is a good feeling to actually create something. And it’s a great feeling to share that with others and feel like there’s a small connection made between the artist and someone who likes what they made. That will never be replaced.

However, there is a risk of making many artist’s lives, particularly digital artist’s, harder than they already are. I think that might be what you are trying to get at. Don’t just protest the new scary technology, protest the reason why you are struggling. And that is a really complicated problem and it’s easier to just say AI bad. But we do need to support our artists, and dismissing their concerns without trying to understand where they are coming from is not helpful.

Honestly asking what does launch capability have to do with it?