In the era of LLMs, it's difficult to think of an art form with a worse risk-to-reward ratio for pursuing--even if just as a hobby--than poetry. I know that sounds philistine to some, but even if the quality of LLM spam isn't up to par with what you can produce, how many people can tell the difference? I wish we lived in an alternate timeline where AI was automating drug discovery or protein folding faster than it was art, but sadly, that's not the case.
I guess I also "wish we lived in an alternate timeline where AI was automating drug discovery or protein folding faster than it was art"
At the same time, however, I feel like this kind of catastrophizing about the end art has happened so many times before (e.g., with the invention of photography, the rise of abstract art, or the emergence of digital art tools).
Each time, artists have adapted, found new ways to express themselves, and pushed the boundaries of creativity. AI might change the landscape of art (it certainly will), but it's unlikely to spell its end. Instead, it could (it certainly will) become a new tool for artists to explore and expand their creative horizons, much like how digital tools have been integrated into many artistic practices today.
I got that, and the reason why I said "even if just as a hobby" is that part of the satisfaction many (including myself) get from their art comes from sharing it with other people, even without profit, and right now, poetry is probably more devalued by AI (thanks to LLMs) than any other art form.
