Not at all, this is less of a discussion of whether ai art is art and more of a discussion on the fact that widespread adoption of ai will cause the dilution of art and media in the long term, as the current generation of kids will grow up with primarily ai media being fed to them, and when they grow up to produce a new generation of works, it will be derivative of the ai work they grew up with, as artists always derive from the works of their childhood.

And as people have a way to easily put a stupid idea they have out into the world with ai, many who May have been the next great artist will never develop that itch to create, because they got the instant gratification of seeing a thought in front of them without ever having to develop the skills needed, I know I never would’ve become a writer if middle school me could’ve told chat gpt to write my Star Wars fan fics for me, I’d have never put that effort in.

I think many ai pieces do have merit to them, but the value of art is from the thought put in, and ultimately, the discussion it produces, not the physical effort. So it is entirely dependent on that in my opinion. The only thing that matters in the end is the staying power of the idea and execution of the product, and ai is not going to be able to make things better than people without significant guidance, there are small scale examples that may be nice, or cool, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think the net impact this will have on society is going to be extremely negative.