No AI Art, support human artists

___There is an important update below___

I did not speak about this topic for a long time. I have seen many opinions and arguments in one direction or another.
Recently, I left a comment under a discussion post by artist Anato Finnstark. I tried to explain in detail my point of view on this matter.
Here is what I wrote then:

"I completely agree with you!
I am very upset that the same type of works made by AI began to appear in the feed. I would like at least one platform to create a hashtag blacklist so that AI-made work is no longer displayed to me.
I understand that AI is just a tool and the author remains the ideological creator of these works, but for some reason, I cannot accept this explanation in my soul and mind.
I really get upset when I see how many artists who start their journey and cannot convey their idea (due to little practice), are tempted to use AI to achieve a high degree of detail and beauty.
But in my opinion, art is also related to the process of creating a work. Those emotions that the creator experiences during the creation of his work, those meanings that he wants to put into it - this is what makes the work individual and unique.
I also wish all beginners not to give up on this long and difficult path! Artistic craft has outlived photography and will outlive AI. I believe in the creator and his work!
P.S. I don't mean that AI can't be used at all. I understand that there are artistic areas where AI can help the artist achieve a presentable result in a shorter time.
This is just my opinion and you can have your own opinion on this matter and most importantly, that this is normal."

I want to express my deep gratitude to the artists who were not afraid to express their point of view here and now.
To be honest, I did not think that so many people would gather in one place and time to raise this difficult issue.
I hope this will make it clear to many that they are not alone in their opinion.

-------

UPD.
A few days after the start of this protest, I delved into this topic and understood the genuine indignation of the artists.

As it turned out, the "AI" technology uses paintings drawn by other artists to create works. These are different things, draw a work on a blank canvas (using brushes) or generate a collage + throw on filters.
But the problem is not even so much in creating works (that this is just a collage with a filter), but what kind of pictures he uses to create these works. As other artists describe (and I tend to believe them), the programs use any work and do not care about the Copyrights and licenses under which these paintings are distributed. This is where the main problem lies.

And I have a question, since when is stealing the pussy of other people's work the norm?

A couple of years ago, there was a case with an artist (I don’t remember the name exactly), who used other people’s work to create his works, and then coated them and added the necessary elements. As a result of this scandal, he lost the opportunity to cooperate with major studios (they added him to the blacklist) and received public censure (and I'm sure this is not an isolated case).

So what's the difference? Why do we blame the man for this but defend the machine?

I will reiterate that I am not against true AI. I am against an algorithm (and this cannot be called otherwise) that compiles "new" works from other people's works.

True AI should be able to work with a brush (perhaps faster than a human), and not steal pieces of other people's work.