I keep seeing more and more things about the new AI programs, I'm curious what HP's community thinks of all this. The biggest concern I keep seeing is that the databases have collected art without permission from the artist to "learn" how to create the new art. On an even larger scale it's already started to take jobs from artists which is a scary future to think of to me. As a hobby artist, I can't imagine what the people that make art as a career are feeling as they see their livelihood be stolen by A.I.

So, I use Midjourney AI to create either elements that I use in backgrounds (e.g. https://www.deviantart.com/utakata-creations/art/Dark-corners-of-the-world-93925110 https://www.deviantart.com/utakata-creations/art/Night-of-intrigues-9340842338) or entire background images (e.g. https://www.deviantart.com/utakata-creations/art/Just-like-heaven-936728208 https://www.deviantart.com/utakata-creations/art/Dreams-and-Illusions-932797899).

However, that is the one and only way that I would ever use it - as a useful resource. I don't believe that anyone generating AI images can truly call it 'art', as I believe that art has to involve more creative input than simply knowing which prompts to enter in order to generate the right image. Call me a traditionalist, but I'll forever be more impressed by old oil paintings than a canvas painted blue, etc.

And yes, it absolutely worries me that people using AI programs are already beginning to market themselves as 'artists', especially as my gut feeling is that the general public don't truly understand how important that differentiation is between something human-created, and something generated by coding, and perhaps don't realise that 'AI art' doesn't involve any actual... you know... artistry?

It's... a complex issue, and whilst there's been a sudden rush of interest surrounding it, I would imagine that it won't be long before tighter restrictions are placed on the use of AI-generated images to prevent the outright copying actual artists' work, and so on. At least, I really, really hope that this is what happens.

I def agree with your appreciate of true art. I feel a little cheated when I find out that A.I. has been used.

The biggest piece I struggle with is to see the difference between using A.I. that has "learned" from copyrighted art to generate images and just using copyrighted art yourself and not crediting. It couldn't come up with anything on it's own so it took from original artists. The rules keep changing with each platform so it'll be interesting to see what places like HP do with it.

It would be interesting if they could limit the libraries that AI programs are allowed to draw from to almost 'stock' type images - those which the original images creators have opted to allow to be used - rather than giving them free rein across the entire net.

I agree with this being a 'scary' development, but it's a thing that will never go away I'm afraid. I personally use nightcafe.ai for inspiration. I did Inktober while using AI and it gave me some crazy stuff. Interesting enough: One of The prompts was 'snot', and I placed it in a disney AI to get  a 'character' 
I drew thew character, which looked very familiar to me, and yes, I figured out it was actually 'almost' a famous character: Mike Wazowski.

I see the possibilities, but I'm curious on the future development of copyrighting AI 'art' and the infringement of it because it will obviously use others people art.

I can't really call it 'art'. In my opinion Art really is something where a person is involved making it, lending its own hand and mind/spirits to it. Because Art is not the same without the artists 'human' perspective.