Yes I've heard of innovations that received negative criticism from people but that are nowdays accepted or are about to be normalized. It's true that people are the ones who give meaning and purpose to tools by how they use it. Like martial arts: boxers are usually considered as aggressive beasts, while such people are actually met in the streets at night. While there are some people who brag about being a martial artist, there are some who don't and use it when needed. So as you said, how AI is used depends on the person, and in this case is acceptable, or rather, understandable. But AI has something way different to it, unlike digital art, that while gives many tools to make your work easier, still requires a good art knowledge to draw well, in fact, it's a great innovation that made artists' work more comfortable! As for photography, I don't see it as something bad at all, and I wouldn't understand the issues people used to have, because those pictures can be used as a good reference. And there is a bit of skill required, since you might need good reflexes to capture certain moments. But AI? It can be used as an anatomy reference to some extent, the lighting can be sometimes wrong. And, as if it wasn't enough, some people opened a Patreon and gain money by basically generating art! The context in here is different, because this is completely disrespectful to some other artists, of any kind, that put hard work to reach a certain level. Luckily they didn't reach a level of fame like various artists, so this puts me at ease. And sadly, as you said, I can complain as much as I want, AI art might continue existing. But at least, I can say I still have won this non-existent pointless battle, because I didn't lose my pride, and I'll keep putting more work to become a better artist. :)