> > future artists having their jobs taken by AIs
> that's simply not going to happen
It will indeed happen, though not to all artists.
> as in every technological development so far, this is just another tool.
Just like every other tool, it changes things, and not everyone wants to change. Those who embrace the new tech are more likely to thrive. Those who don't, less likely.
> 1) artists create the styles out of thin air
> 2) artists create the images out of thin air
I understand what you're saying, but as an artist, I can't agree. No artist lives in total isolation. No artist creates images out of thin air. Those who claim to are lying, or just don't realize how they're influenced.
How artists are influenced varies, obviously, but for me I think that however I've been influenced, that influence impacts my output similarly to how the latest generation of AI driven image generation works.
I'm influenced by the collective creative output of every artist who's stuff I've seen. An AI tool is influenced by its model. I don't see a lot differences there, conceptually speaking. There are obvious differences about human experience, model training, bias, etc, but that's a much larger conversation. Those differences do matter, but I don't think they matter enough to change my stance conceptually they work the same in terms of leveraging "influence" to create something unique.
> 3) computers are just collectors of this data and do not actually originate anything new. they are just very clever copycats.
Stable Diffusion does a pretty damn good job of mixing artistic styles to the point where I have no problem disagreeing with you here. It comes as close to originating something new as humans do. You could argue about how it does it disqualifies its output as "origination", but those same arguments would be just as effective at disqualifying humans for the same reasons.
That all said, I agree with you that the tech is a disruptive tool. It's a threat the same way that cameras were a threat to portrait artists, or Autocad for architects, or CNC machines for machinists might be a threat. The idea that new tech doesn't take jobs is naive - it always does. But it doesn't always completely eliminate those jobs. Those who adapt and leverage and take advantage of the new tools can still survive and thrive. Those who reject the new tech might not. Some might find a niche in using "old" techniques (which in away still leverages the new tech - as a marketing/differentiation strategy).
For me, I've been using Stable Diffusion a lot lately as a tool for creating my own art. It's an incredibly useful tool for sketching out ideas, playing with color, lighting, and composition.