> So I'm asking you: where is the line between good tools that enable human creativity by making it easier to express things, and bad tools that make it too eas

> So I'm asking you: where is the line between good tools that enable human creativity by making it easier to express things, and bad tools that make it too easy to express things? Because if you can't answer that, we can't actually have a discussion about this topic. Well, I do think there's at least a sufficient requirement in crossing that line: it is when the tool starts to give input into your creation based on what you are drawing/doing. For example, yes, the computer takes away the artistry and writing by hand but if I'm in a text editor, it won't suggest a particular story based on my additional ideas any more than a pen would or a charcoal on rock. Another example: if I use a film camera versus digital, I basically see the same thing through the viewfinder before I even press the shutter. Or paiting: whether I'm using my fingers or a brush, I don't see any way to proceed but through my imagination. AI crosses that line because it is like a sophisticated paint by numbers: it constrains you by guiding you down a path through its preconceived ideas. It is like a "choose your own adventure" book, if you've ever read one. It's not the same as actually going on an adventure.