I don't like it, and won't use it myself. I haven't 'banned' it at my pub, but may do so.

I am working on a piece about capitalism and innovation, which refers to Silicon Valley tech bros as 'deceptive cheerleaders for capitalism's false virtues'.

This got me thinking that a caricature of a Musk-like figure wearing a high school cheerleader outfit would make a good title image (and be a good way of winding up the fanboiz, who would be shocked to see his phallic rocket virility mocked).

I could have got a generative AI program to create that image, but felt that was wrong. If I complain about people posting AI-generated text because they don't have the ability or want to make the effort to write to for themselves, I shouldn't do the same with artwork.

Luckily, I have access to an in-house artist in the form of my son, who dashed off the caricature in half and hour. Had I no access to his skills, I would just have left it. Or maybe just produced a humorous collage myself in Canva, as other writers do, rather than just press a button. It would have looked shoddier, but been more authentic and ethical, which is what matters.

This is an important issue, I feel, John. Thanks for raising it, as I do think many writers feel it's a perfectly valid tool in their kit, and I think that's wrong.