Again: My issue was the wording "democratizing art" and "gatekeeping skills".

A painfully stupid and verifiably incorrect misrepresentation of the status quo. Terrible terminology mainly used by AI tech bro’s to sell their unethical services.

I simply put it into context WHY the wording is bad.

7.) Long story short: It would be better to shy away from sugarcoating and framing this as something it isn’t.

"Democratizing art", this is not. A tool against "gatekept skills", this is not. A full replacement for practice, this is not.

It’s a flawed helper, which still requires competency.

6.) Whether you tell an AI to generate images or code: Nothing can replace actually putting the hours into practice.

Getting to results fast does not guarantee quality results, which can harm the learning process in the long run. Not getting fundamentals right will turn into an issue at some point.

5/2.) To get an actual, long-lasting result, it’s not enough to watch a video or to "tell someone / something" to create a specific result. Putting in the hours to learn a skill in combination with that dopamine rush is what creates skills. Practice makes perfect. Not copy & paste (with extra steps)

5.) The big issue here is with how our brain is wired. It can’t properly distinguish between having accomplished something ourselves and having witnessed something being accomplished.

That’s why people are stuck in tutorial hell. The dopamine rush is exactly the same…

4.) The ends don’t justify the means here. Bloating this large-scale theft that’s being done to content of all sorts of mediums up to make it sound like it cures cancer is not helpful in any way. It’s disingenuous and harmful, to those who being stolen from as well as - to a degree - to the users…

3.) Taking the results of other people’s hard work without their consent or compensation, repackaging and selling it for profit - which is what AI providers do and what I simply call theft - is not "democratizing" art. It’s theft. Calling it anything but is simply acting in bad faith.

2.) Hammering a prompt into a piece of software to "create" something is not the same thing as being able to actually create something yourself.

Due to how the tech works, your prompt is a mere "index search with extra steps". You are still telling others and yourself you did something you did not.

I simply have issues with your wording.

1.) Neither Da Vinci nor any other artist is "gatekeeping" you from being able to draw the Mona Lisa. You not being able to draw the Mona Lisa right now is nothing but a skill issue on your end. But you can learn to do so. For free. Right now.

Again… „gatekept skills“. What an utter nonsense. You are not entitled to the results of other people’s hard earned skills, especially not without their consent. The tech can be useful and good if done right.

But your choice of words remains bad faithed sugarcoating.

„Democratizing“ shouldn’t rely on stealing from hard working people, taking quality work without consent. And it should absolutely not be based on paying the thieves, rather than the ones whose quality work makes all of this possible in the first place.

So tired of all this sugarcoating lingo…