[iammjm]

When it comes to art, I'd rather consume something that is interesting/meaningful/beautiful/revolutionary/etc. It's all about the thing itself; it has always been. Less ego in all of this could actually be a good thing.

[asmor]

I don't think I disagree strongly. But I also don't think generative AI tools will do that just based on how they're built. Everything they can do, someone probably did better from scratch.

[bombdailer]

Every artist of worth has sought two things: to bring something of beauty into the world, and to be regarded in their worth in proportion to the greatness of their art. You suggest we take from them the beauty they have brought forth, and leave them with nothing in return but scorn. What then has the artist to gain from their endeavors, when not only are they the be ridden of the significance of their authorship, but that then their works are to be put to use to feed the all consuming machine which benefits not the artist but those running the machine?

Art is not just about the thing produced, stripped of its context and significance, and forced to be interpreted by ignorant minds who, in their ignorance, consider themselves capable of deriving meaning of value out of words and pictures they can scarcely comprehend from their own limited perspective.

The significance of all art is derived from its historical context, the authors implicit intentions and mode of creation, and the unique experience generated from an individual consuming the art. If you suggest only the consumers experience matters, then you are free to forgo the greater appreciation of art in favor of the lessened experience of it if you wish. For greater awareness and understanding of the details of the parts allow us to better understand the significance of the whole. Only art that is of little value is lessened by our deepened understanding of it.

[mistrial9]

my point of view changed when I had to step over dying people to get into my new studio space --some famous artist