I don`t use the AI you can find on the internet to make my works.
I make my drawings with a mouse and graphic design applications and with a series of applications that I have programmed myself (a kind of graphic plugins), I convert those drawings into hundreds of different versions that I combine to create each collection. Sometimes, as in the white backgrounds of the mosaic collection, I apply a series of more than 2500 logos that I made for a contest website.
My images are not published on networks and access to the works on this website is restricted. The beauty of my works lies in their novelty, whoever owns my pictures will enjoy that novelty on their wall, when these novel ideas become popular they will become just another filter that the AI will bore us with.
With this I want to make it clear that I do use digital media that, with some manual intervention, help me to create my works, but in no case do I use artificial intelligence, in fact I have hidden my website from Google and access to my collection is private to prevent the AI from learning from my works, which I am quite sure will eventually happen, but first I need to achieve a series of milestones for my work, otherwise the message of my work will be lost and it will become just another filter in the collection of the AI or any other graphic programme.

In this new world in which technology rules, each person must be clear about the limits and the barriers they are not willing to cross, in my case the limit is the AI because it is not a mere graphic tool, it is a content generator that tries to supplant human content, this is very serious for me because the message, and above all the human intentionality behind this message, is the most important part of my work.

If this message becomes an automatism then my work will be nothing more than another spam content like those that saturate the networks, the new only communicates once, when you find it repeated thousands of times it gets boring and if the medium is flooded with this type of messages replicated thousands of times you realise that the medium is no longer useful for communicating and you disconnect it. This is what is already happening with Google and its AI, which has been created as an entity behind which hides a single intentionality (the one that really exists, the human intentionality of its creators) that exists in the minds of Google`s directors: to appropriate all human creations and content, since this AI, which supposedly "creates content", does nothing but version what already exists without attributing the true authorship of the sources, with the result that the new creations supplant the originals and we authors lose all rights over this content, which is nothing more than a remix of our knowledge over which we original authors no longer have any rights.
With this sophisticated artifice, Google (the owner and inventor of AI) intends to go one step further in its profit account, now it also intends to appropriate our content and all human knowledge.

AI is not only an artificial content generator, but a filter of that content, there are many things you won`t find in AI, just like in totalitarian regimes you won`t find in AI any criticism, like this one, of Google or AI.
Already aware of our own reality, we small creators face an immense challenge and an unfair and treacherous struggle with AI, and its creator Google, in competition for a necessary channel for the dissemination of our messages and works.

The public AI on the internet is itself a filter of ideas, it is only capable of replicating what it already knows, what it has been taught before, it is not capable of realising what it does not know. On the other hand, the artist (some artists, not all) creates from his inner world, an authentic universe of subjectivity unknown to the world, that is what the artist tries to communicate. When the world understands that world, and recognises in it the novelty, it always tries to replicate it again and again in its eagerness to understand that novelty, it is in that period when the AI is taught to automatically realise those new ideas, not before. That is why the only moment in the artist`s work in which authentic communication is possible is at the precise moment of incredulity and amazement in which the public begins to marvel at the novelty represented by the work of the new artist, afterwards, when that work achieves recognition it is simply imitated and versioned, it is when the AI converts that novelty into yet another of its filters and no longer has any other meaning than the aesthetic one, by then already well known.
The public AI on the internet is itself a filter of ideas, it is only capable of replicating what it already knows, what it has been taught before, it is not capable of realising what it does not know. On the other hand, the artist (some artists, not all) creates from his inner world, an authentic universe of subjectivity unknown to the world, that is what the artist tries to communicate. When the world understands this subjective universe of the artist, and recognises in it the novelty, it always tries to replicate it again and again in its eagerness to understand this novelty, it is in this period when the AI is taught to automatically realise the new ideas, not before. That is why the only moment in the artist`s work in which authentic communication is possible is at the precise moment of incredulity and amazement in which the public begins to marvel at the novelty represented by the work of the new artist, then, when that work achieves recognition it is simply imitated and versioned, it is when the AI converts that novelty into yet another filter with no other meaning than aesthetic enjoyment, which by then is already well known.