But with improvements to the models I can see it fitting into a "integrated into professional creative tooling" business model. Generate a rough "first draft" based on a prompt and edit. It simultaneously keeps a human in the loop to filter some of the model's zanier outputs, makes sure the output coheres with some design vision, and also people using these features professionally are much more likely to actually pay for what will be fairly expensive-to-operate features.
I'm excited about generative models, buuuuut I will echo the other thoughts here re: VC hype. The last cycle of VC investments turned out to be full of hot air and no substance. The kind of hype around generative models feels a lot like crypto: lots of breathless excitement combined with few details. We are simply being promised that this technology will usher in some kind of golden era but nobody can seem to point to killer use cases. There's so much hand-waving around actual applications that it threatens to generate a hurricane from the sheer amount of air being displaced.
As someone who works in the AI/ML field I've explored this stuff and it's definitely promising for some use cases and can potentially be transformative for some niches, but I do not see this as world-transformative at this point and considering where said breathless hypeness is coming from I'd encourage caution in over-exuberance.
[edit] My sincere hope for this new cycle of tech hype is that we actually create some businesses of worth. I do not expect this to come from VC-world, who seem to have spent the last decade building wholly incompetent businesses and foisting them on public investors (or in the case of crypto and ICOs, just fleecing retail investors directly).
My hope is that developers can actually use these models to do valuable things that people will pay for, as opposed to shovel yet more money into yet more furnaces to prop up absurd valuations around comparably tiny revenue.