- "A small red cottage on a green lawn on a short distance from a wood-side lake on a sunny and cloudy day. Flowers are growing on a nearby field. By the lakeside is a worn-down wooden jetty with a brand new blue skiff."
- "Grotesque impression of a large woman on a throne chair with a busy room of the castle."
- "A lonely figure looking at the horizon of a vast desert on a moonlit night."
- "Robot handing a small flower to a human baby in a basket, 3d render."
As a left-hemisphere kind of man, I really see this as a game-changer. And it definitely won't make life easier for artists. It is not the same as when AlphaZero gave both go and chess a boost by beating the best. Anybody can now create art for a children's book about a wizard rabbit, or for a steampunk card game, or for backgrounds for a 2D sci-fi platform game, or make a click-bait image for YouTube, or... you get the picture.
Sure, it's not going to revolutionize art. But it's going to revolutionize how cheaply and easyly art is to incorporate into everything else. It's now super-easy to have a digital landscape painting on the wall, which in a totally un-curated way will renew itself every day.
So artists as a trade is the first to suffer from AI. Second comes taxi/truck drivers. Third is low-level lawyers. What then? Who will pay for their loss of income? What should they do instead? This might be the most important problem to solve for humanity, possibly much worse of a problem than climate change or poverty.
But the biggest question of all is of course: how long until they get the rat to eat the cat?