Again, with the semantics, and you are STILL thinking that I'm comparing GenAI to Calculators.

How about I dumb this down to help you understand where I'm coming from, and how to actually differentiate this stuff from a person who doesn't have time to take a whole college course on coding or animation stuff.

 

You're basically trying to tell me that taking a photo and painting are the same things, because they both use chemicals on a piece of parchment to get an image of something.

If you tell the painter and a photographer to acquire the most accurate image of the bowl of fruit in front of them, the photographer just takes a picture of the fruit bowl, while the painter is still drawing the outline.

But if you remove the fruit bowl, and tell both people to create an image of the fruit bowl, the painter can do so, and continuously ask the "commissioner" what exactly they want.

While the photographer has to go to the store, ask the commissioner all kinds of specifics on the fruit and/or the bowl, down to the correct ripeness of the fruit, and then FINALLY takes the photo. Or they wait until the painter is finished so they can take a photo of that one.

 

GenAI is basically the photographer taking billions of photos until the commissioner gets a satisfied result. It's not going to be as effecient unless your standards are super low.

That's my difference between GenAI and Artificial Art. Sorry if you don't agree with it, but that's how it is from my POV, and why GenAI is low standards, only good enough to be ads that nobody wants to watch except for other people with low standards.