The primary concerns with digital AI art isn't hobbyists, it's copyright infringement. AI Art replaces an industry "art creation" with AI that does it for cheaper, and abuses publicly available artwork in order to do so. They're stealing other people's hardwork in order to also take their jobs from them. I didn't feel the need to refute this point, because no one will care nearly as much about copyright if their livelihoods aren't being threatened.

As for "completely changing the wording of “a large part of hobbies is acknowledgment of talent” to “only doing a hobby to be special is bad”.", your entire argument is founded on humans only doing hobbies only to have their talents acknowledged.

But if you want an direct example of it all, just look at like, Youtube, or anything else. You'll never stack up to the top channels, so why bother? Because they want to create content for other people to consume, and they do want to be acknowledged, even if it isn't as being the best. Hobbyists competing against AI in a field as subjective as art probably won't feel any real pressure from AI, unless that AI is being pumped by big time corporations or something.

The threat of AI isn't AI itself, it's the people who own it. I'm not really sure where we're even standing against each other at this point, but I'm pretty sure my position is "AI is a tool in the hands of people who would abuse it" and my goals are "prevent this abuse" and "ensure everyone can benefit from AI".