And I'M saying that you're right. Therefore, AI, in order to be good at what it does, needs people to guide it in ways that will make it interesting. You are going to have a short time where everything it produces is novel, but it will become quickly apparent that AI is not original or creative, and then it's not exploitable.

Let me put this another way. Say I went out and had a grizzly bear encounter. If I come back and say AI, write a grizzly bear book, it's going to be boring and uninspired.

However, now I explain the encounter, give it a sample of my writing style and then tell it to merge my style with, say, Jack London. It can write that encounter with a blended style, making it unique. You'll say, it's stealing from Jack London, but I could just as easily go study Jack London and try to do the same thing. It's just harder. AI takes a fraction of the effort, but all of the vision and experience is that of the author, not the AI. It's just easier.

Your argument is akin to people arguing that people shouldn't use electric tools because it's not real work.

---