The question is not whether generative AI has legitimate use cases, as it might well do, but whether those use cases justify the enormous cost of generative AI; the uncompensated theft and plagiarism on an unprecedented scale, the massive amounts of energy and water required to maintain the systems, the encroaching attempts to abolish the creative industries to replace them with AI, etc.It's not enough to say, even accurately, "Look, AI can do this thing that we couldn't before that's actually useful!"; you have to explain why that's worth all the downsides, and nobody who has advanced a plausible argument for the former has any kind of answer for the latter.