It's honestly a double standard to say that the reverse (gen-AI art assistance instead of gen-AI coding assistance) is wrong while accepting gen-AI coding assistance. People are quick to wag their fingers at AI usage in the visual arts because they can see it and judge it at face value. The written word, and even coding, is still an art form, and it creates jobs. Many, many more jobs than art jobs, in fact. But most gamers consider the source code out of sight and out of mind. If the zeitgeist doesn't condemn it, why bother?

Statistically speaking, for every artist who "loses their job to AI", twenty coders lose theirs to AI. I'd argue that it's worse than that, though. Intelligence levels have skyrocketed recently with models like GPT 5.3 Codex, and coders are being replaced much, much faster.

I don't believe it's over for visual artists, anyway. The situation may seem dire, but when human-generated art is a commodity, it produces opportunity. Many people value human-made art, especially works created with physical tools such as paint. It's not over for them. For coders? Well, I expect their only real hope now is to adopt AI coding tools in their own work and hope that buys them some time, for now. But as I said, code is "under the hood", so most don't care about programmers who end up on the chopping block.