There are some aspects that aren't skill-based though. Anyone can do it, but some people thrive in that environment, while others have a more difficult time, just like any other job.
The Jellyfin Documentation has info on setting it up and installing it. I have it running on an odroid hc4, but pretty much anything with enough storage will be fine (an old laptop laying around is a great way to experiment with server stuff).
I don't have much in terms of automation--I have a script that syncs local files with my server. What else did you have in mind?
To be fair, some people aren't great at being a homemaker--it's a particular passion and skill set and it's not for everyone. But blindly drawing that distinction on gender lines is definitely a boomer thing.
Had an older guy at work who had four kids, and when it came up in conversation, he proudly noted that he had never changed a diaper. Told him that I'd be mortified to admit I was such a useless dad.
I can't say how many people are trying to make money on it, but there are plenty of folks running Plex or Jellyfin servers that they'll allow friends and family to access. And I would estimate that a fairly low percentage of those have no pirated content on them. So even for the small-group servers, discussions of piracy are often relevant.
I do run a Jellyfin server, but only locally on my own network.
If we consider what happened with Trump's exwife, I'd guess he'd order a hit on Melania a couple days before her NDA expires, then bury her a couple days later on one of his own golf courses.
There are a couple ways to approach the argument: we can talk about the art LLMs can produce (and whether it should be called art), and we can also talk about the long-term ramifications.
The arguments about what LLMs can produce are weaker. Art is subjective, and trying to quantify things like "originality" and "soul" is difficult. Plus, as you mentioned, there are plenty of successful artists that are arguably untalented. Ultimately, LLMs can produce something that some people want, at least somewhat. That being said, I would argue that a drum machine on its own is soulless--and I think Prince would agree. It's the other pieces that make it something more.
The stronger argument is the other one--the long term ramifications. Unlike everything that has come before (synths, sampling, etc), art has always cost someone something. If nothing else, it takes time and effort for a person to create something, and there's some measure of skill involved (EDM, for example, takes skill in composition rather than performance).
LLMs can produce "art" for negligible (immediate) cost. This is pretty new. And it's undercutting an already slim market. The likely long-term effects include thinning it further, to the point where "artist" is untenable as a career.
What makes that different from other areas where technology has replaced human efforts? The big difference is that LLM art depends on the human artists creating art. The more prominent LLM art becomes, the less human art is created, and the worse LLM art becomes. It's like a snake eating its own tail, or a factory that uses its own foundation as raw materials--it's a self-destructing system.
Another argument to be considered is motivation: the people who are gung-ho about LLM art are typically so because it means they don't have to pay humans to do the same thing. Which is less problematic in other industries, but given that art is often a form of emotional expression (as opposed to something like a manufacturing job), there's a stronger argument that maybe the art should be left to humans.
I think it was summed up nicely by someone who posted something along the lines of, "I want AI to do the mundane tasks so I can spend time making art, not the other way around."
One of the big differences is that it takes talent (typically from years of practice) to create something good--it's far more than just the input of other art.
For example, most people listen to plenty of music. We all have a ton of influences to pull from. But writing a song is difficult, even if all the individual elements can be traced to different influences. To write a good song, it usually takes skill deveoped with practice. And if it really is just a few other ideas merged together with nothing original or compelling, it will likely be criticised as derivative and unoriginal.
AI has two big issues: 1. It's only capable of creating unoriginal derivatives without originality or "soul", and 2. Its usage is detrimental to the art community that it relies on. As people attempt to replace artists with AI, being an artist becomes and even less viable living (something that was already difficult). And without human artists, we're culturally stuck recycling the same drivel for eternity, which in turn deteriorates (think of a document that is copied, then that copy is copied, and so on until the contents are barely legible).
There are some aspects that aren't skill-based though. Anyone can do it, but some people thrive in that environment, while others have a more difficult time, just like any other job.