Raw LLM Responses

Yeah there's some good thoughts here. Ultimately art used to be 'it's basically anything' and now artists are like "wait robots? no that's not art actually, you need a human to make art" and it's been interesting to see that shift as the paradigm shifts. I'm not against that reframing of the concept, but it's all so new that everyone is working on different assumptions and definitions and trying to kick or defend different goalposts. And to be fair, there was already enough controversy around what is art before computer-generated images started being labeled as such. AI doesn't make art, it makes data. It arranges data in ways that satisfy some prompt or task. And if that data happens to contain or imply or communicate 'art' then that is perfectly valid and possible for a viewer to recieve but also not a given. If an artist uses said data and makes a work of art with some of it as part or even all of the work, they can label the product art; It is then on others to critique the thing, and accept or refute or critique the work. I do believe there is interesting and novel work that can be completed using AI tools today and moreso in the coming years. I also am utterly disinterested in the overwhelming slop and seek the human-made works. AI can be used to make the impossible possible but when it makes the possible worthless, that's when most people aren't willing to pay.