AI will only replace the work of creatives who have already turned themselves into AIs long ago. There are plenty of writers and illustrators out there who hav

AI will only replace the work of creatives who have already turned themselves into AIs long ago. There are plenty of writers and illustrators out there who have trained themselves to churn out reproducible garbage over the years in order to fulfill the demands of content marketing. These jobs will be replaced by AI soon, but by creating content from a formula they've already be using a crude form of AI. I really love Stable Diffusion, but, as a means of creating art (including the most common forms of popular art), it can only supplement existing work not replace it. I pay for plenty of real art in my home and the best works on my walls could never be replicated by an AI because what makes them beautiful is precisely the human touches that I have yet to see AI generate (and suspect it can't). Latent Diffusion Models also have a pretty poor imagination. At the same time Stable Diffusion has gotten me thinking about creative projects I could undertake that would have been impossible years ago. But it's obvious that all of these projects will take plenty of work to create, and SD will ultimately just be another tool in the creative process. I vividly remember when photoshop started to gain major acceptance and there was a similar anti-photoshop sentiment among "real" designers and artists. What's funny is how many webcomic authors I see critiquing AI art, when I remember quite well pen and ink comic artist similarly scoffing at web artists that used digital tools to create their work. Hopefully we'll see SD and similar tools accepted as more tools to create cool art, rather than a misplaced focus of peoples career anxiety.