That's the perfect word for this, because we have to ask what this would look like if it metastisized.
Algorithm illustrates the book -> Algorithm writes the book -> Algorithm generates the audio to read the book to your kids for you -> Algorithm mines trends and engagement stats to decide which books it will write.
It's the total annihilation of literature, and all the way more creative people get cut out and the bottom line pads the pockets of the publishers who own it. Humanities without humanity, i.e. nothing.
I predict DALL-E art to be on the level of those freaky auto-generated kids' videos for a long time. People see those as successful too. Millions of Views with very little Cost.
I'm reading your comment as saying that there is some sine qua non about art that professional driving lacks - but I think that may just be your bias as an artist. If software produces results that are as good or better than yours, what is lost by replacing artists with software?
I'm also not writing this just to dig at professional artists and drivers. I think my career too is in the process of being replaced by software. I have doubts and misgivings about whether this will be entirely good, but it seems clear that it is happening and that most (all?) professions are or will soon be in a similar state.
computers are useless, they can only provide answers
Children's book illustrators, though, really? How do we benefit if we make it impossible for that to be a living? Is there any benefit to you or your children if they look at pictures generated from a machine learning algorithm based on past images instead of by a human artist that was paid for their creation? Is there any benefit to artists? Is there any benefit to society as a whole, or to any individuals except the owners of the algorithms generating the pictures and the publishers who save a relatively minor [1] cost?
Personally I doubt ML-illustrated children's books would catch on as anything more than a novelty simply because generating illustrations in this way seems so dystopian, impersonal and tacky, but the way people react to new technology is something I find very hard to predict.
[1] Typically between £6,500 and £8,500 per book according to https://www.peopleofpublishing.com/post/how-much-does-a-chil...
Imagine taking the cost of illustrating a children's book from 10k USD (plus who knows how much time) to paying a 10 dollar per month fee to create unlimited illustrations? What would that enable? How many more children's books would get produced? How much more happiness for children and would be authors?
My mother used to tell us stories about characters she had made up. With a little more time, if this technology existed, she could have illustrated her stories and shown them to us. Or, if this technology gets invented tomorrow, I could create generate the illustrations from what I remember of my mom's stories and share it with her. Why wouldn't I want this? Because professional illustrators would be devalued?
Let's not forget the children who lack interesting content or concerned parents who would create it for them. These kids could benefit from a reddit or imgur of children's books and get an infinite scroll of content. If software becomes good enough the infinite scroll could be generated automatically.