I appreciate your detailed explanation. Your strong feelings on the topic are clear, but I would caution that what you see as “lazy and stupid”, other people see as “time-saving” and “convenient”. Similar arguments have been laid at other technological innovations throughout history, and even societal changes like the 40-hour work week! It’s thus very important to examine very carefully modern versions of that argument to see if they’re just reactionary or if there’s something about modern developments that makes them wholly unique from these older ones we’ve accepted.
I agree that it’s important to not misuse A.I. tools. But we need to come to a societal consensus about what is actually misuse and what is just something that some people don’t like.
But why is it insulting? And what purpose does it serve to restrict it to humans? Why shouldn’t artists be able to take advantage of labor-reducing tools as much as computer programmers?
And even then, it seems your problem is not with AI itself but with a specific application of AI.
Fair use of copyrighted material is not as clear-cut as you seem to think. There are numerous criteria, many of them somewhat subjective, that must be met for an infringing use to be deemed fair.
That said, many generative AI models are now using entirely licensed or public-domain training datasets for just this reason.
It’s not Home Ec, it’s her bedroom. See the Cadet Luna poster on the wall?
But more to the point, people’s situations can change over time. Her family may have needed assistance at one point, but not anymore.