I can see why this is important. As a very decentralized person I think permanent banning is a little much but that seems to be just for hive-watchers and not the entire platform itself.
When I first started using AI I actually considered posting articles. After the first prompt I realized that's just not how I would word it and it goes against what I believe to be the proper way to post on hive. Which is that my blogs should be my own original thoughts. I also considered quoting an AI prompt and citing generated with this ai Writing a good prompt takes some thought. An artist that specializes in music will excel in creating ai generated music.
So it is not a surprise to me at all that text-generated ai is a big no.
When it comes to digital art generated by AI, I would tend to use it instead of something like royalty free images as a banner or post thumbnail because I can prompt an image that will give me what I want vs trying to find an image that will work for me.
Of course I have no problem citing that it was generated by AI but for the most part the generated art I intend to include in my articles will not be the main focus.
Big kudos and props to designers and artists that create amazing artwork manually whether it is digital or by hand. It takes real talent to do that. If I could, I would!
RE: AI-Generated Content = Not Original Content