WarmSpill

When seeing your channel and all the AI generated artwork that you are sharing for free under the Creative Commons license, I came across this sentence from another source:

"to live hell on earth and hell in eternity"

Is God conveying something about this?

to:

-approaching or reaching (a particular condition): toward, so as to approach

-expressing the result of a process or action

-identifying the person or thing affected by or receiving something

live:

-spend one's life in a particular way or under particular circumstances: experience, undergo

-supply oneself with the means of subsistence: survive, make ends meet, make a living, sustain oneself

-have an exciting or fulfilling life: flourish, prosper, thrive

hell:

-a place regarded in various religions as a spiritual realm of evil and suffering

-a situation, experience, or place of great suffering: purgatory, suffering, trials and tribulations, a misery..

-used for emphasis or to express anger, contempt, or surprise

on: (relevant meanings)

-having (the thing mentioned) as a topic; about: regarding, concerning, respecting, relevant to, touching on..

earth:

-the planet on which we live; the world: world, planet, sphere..

(sphere means:

-an area of activity, interest, or expertise; a section of society or an aspect of life distinguished and unified by a particular characteristic: domain, realm, field, discipline, speciality...)

in:

-indicating someone's occupation or profession

-expressing a value as a proportion of (a whole)

eternity:

-infinite or unending time..

Interpreting the sentence and words above, you can see that it talks about a very difficult situation. It starts with that it "approaches" this, as the result of a process.

"Live" means that one is experiencing and undergoing certain circumstances. It also means to make a living and sustain oneself.

Then "hell" indicates great suffering and trials etc.

How does it relate to this with sharing artwork for free?

Because artists live by selling work they create, to the public. Giving it away for free won't give them income, or selling it for a very low price is not sustainable to live as an artist. But if others offer similar artwork for free to the consumer, the consumers will be reluctant to buy their work, because there's already an abundance of freely available artwork that is similar (or even of higher quality - as AI is able to produce high quality artwork that it has learned from works from skilled artists).

And right now I read the words: "go to waste".

"Waste" means:

-use or expend carelessly, extravagantly, or to no purpose: squander, misspend, throw away, exhaust, deplete...

-fail to make full or good use of

-deliberately dispose of (surplus stock)

-kill or severely injure (someone): do away with, eliminate, mow down, decimate...

-devastate or ruin (a place): destroy, devastate, ravage, wipe out...

The work/income of the artist goes to waste, as the value of the artwork is depleted/destroyed.

And some more of that sentence was: "because you know all efforts will most likely go to waste."

Because of that, I think many artists may give up their efforts (as a means of income). Likely that's been happening already.

Then I encountered: "It is not in your realm to expect results, but only to do your best and let go at the appropriate time."

I think this may point to in general that artists may use a copyright license that make only themselves allowed to sell their art. But the word here seems to be to not expect results directly, but rather let go of the license at the appropriate time, which is after the consumer has purchased your artwork.

Then I came across: "I know it seems fruitless at the time, when I told you to keep walking with them and they took their own direction over and over again."

I think it's been a long-running problem, even before AI began to be used in art creation, that some consumers or customers shared the artist's work illegally, and the artist was using their copyright to prevent that, or that perhaps the artist didn't want their art to be used commercially or resold in the way some consumers did, or simply was against that it was retraded further on by others.

"..it is as though you have lost them. But I continue to work in their lives, and many times they do turn around."

But the artwork has value in itself, and also, because it has to be purchased for a price, the consumer may also return to the original creator to buy it directly from them. It continues to be sold for a high/reasonable price.

Compare that with if it was shared for free because the consumer didn't have the license to resell it. There would be much less of a reason for the consumers to return to the original creator to buy more, because they got used to that it was available from someone for free.

"But for the ones who don't turn around in spite of my best efforts, and ministers as well, I grieve beyond what you can imagine."

I think this points to a situation of grief where the artwork doesn't "turn around", that is, generate enough income, despite the artist's best efforts (and ministers may perhaps point to legal tools used to prevent copyright infringement etc).

But I hope that by these remedies written here, to ensure that artwork is sold and not given away, can prevent such a situation to get worse, and rather to turn it around for the better for the artists.