Okay, let me break it all down for you, then. How you're so insistent on not actually explaining anything is beyond me, but I guess I have to be the one to spell things out for you because you're more interested in coming off as correct “as an artist” rather than actually responding and supplying information to reveal to me how I might be wrong, but I guess that's the state of the internet now - here's something for you to ponder on that I’ll get to later in this post; it benefits both you and the other party you're talking to to explain what you mean when you say something.
Anyway, I'm more than willing to admit that I don't know anything about being an artist in the textbook definition sense, but that doesn't detract from the fact that making art is something that an actual human being can do because it's something that human beings have been doing since the internet existed.
And since I'm, apparently to you, clearly not an artist (in whatever insane definition you have stuck in the corner of your mind), you need to talk like an actual person and not just say things that don't mean anything to others. That’s kind of the point of communication - to deliver information to others. Mentioning “LUT” and your use of "uncanny valley" both mean nothing to me, so again, the points that you made previously are irrelevant because I don't know what it means, and I have very obviously written it off because of that. (This is what I mean when I say things like "word salad" or "word garbage" when I’ve responded to you. This is something that goes back to the phrase "address the points that I am making". It's only apparent to me now that you're arguing from your position of knowledge rather than discussing the concepts I am trying to get at.) You need to treat your audience as though they don't have the same experience as you do, because I don't, and I’d be more than willing to bet a large sum of money that most people also do not have your specific experiences. Talking down to other people when you're "not defending AI" sounds functionally identical as if you're defending AI, hence why I was saying that you are.
Furthermore, what kind of "AI" are you talking about, here? Are you talking about the use of LLMs and are you using "AI" as the catch-all term as I have been (because that's how almost everyone else uses it based on all of the discussions that I've seen online), or have you been using it in reference to computers participating in repetitive actions? Because if you're using it in the latter manner, you're using it in a way that NOBODY ELSE ONLINE DOES - least of all, me. But for the sake of clarity and because apparently you need me to spell things out as explicitly as possible for you, I'll refer to LLMs as LLMs from here-on-out rather than the catch-all term of "AI" because you're apparently more interested in showing off your knowledge about your field (or using it in the "technically correct" term) rather than socializing with other human beings, online or off.
The fundamental argument I have against the use of LLMs is a concept that I originally learned about from DOOM (2016), and the idea is that while the scientists in said game might have been able to get some useful stuff out of using the technology they developed from studying Hell, but it still made the rest of the world terrible. The idea is that the scientists that made the enemies in the game were fundamentally still using evil technology, and even if it's "for the greater good", it's still degrading the rest of the world.
And I don't use Twitter, actually, because that website is straight-up ass in more ways than one. Matter of fact, I hardly use social media more than I need to because of people like you that get stuck up on textbook definitions (or whatever you think you’re spouting) rather than socialize and act like rational people.
When you go into any kind of situation where you have to communicate with other living beings, it's more expedient to refer to things as they are by the other people in the room, or, it’s wise to at the very least ask what other people mean when they use words that can be misinterpreted. I'm spelling this out for you explicitly because this has been an insane conversation, and frankly, you need to talk to other human beings more often. This kind of stuff is socialization 101. I learned this in both middle and high-school, and that's because I was so socially inept that I didn't learn it earlier, so it makes me think you're even more socially incompetent than I was as both a child and an edgy teenager.
But damn, you sure showed off how much of a technically correct artist you are, so congrats. There’s a win for you. You got me on that point.
Edit: Apparently you're so avid for posting that it seems to me like you should have already known a good portion of the things that I've mentioned, but all of this just goes back to the idea that people like you are more interested in coming off as correct and being the one to "win an argument" rather than actually have the argument so that both sides can benefit, and that's coming from a guy that is solely interested in arguing with other people on this account, so you very clearly need to log off and touch some grass. Surprisingly, you're somehow even more terminally online than I am, and I mean that in the most derogatory sense possible to all parties involved.
You won all of the internets, so please, go back to Reddit, kind stranger.