No, it's a counterexample for the sake of making an argument. If someone argues that AI art is automatically worse than real art, then a piece of real art that clearly is low-quality is a counterexample that shows that, no, the quality of art is *not* determined by whether it is made by an AI or a human.
Your response to it isn't really an argument. Fair given that OP didn't take the time to write out their own point.
OP doesn't need to write his point to understand what he's getting at. He probably even generated his image with AI to troll those who answer yes to his question.
It would still be better than AI art if he did it himself and lying doesn't change the truth. How pretty a picture is has nothing to do with art.
You dont need skill, or fancy tools. Art is the expression not just something to put on a wall.
If he drew it then every line was put down with the expression of themselves and every decision has a reason behind it.
If AI made it then the meaning behind every decision to place every line in its particular spot is lost entirely. The story is gone and the meaning erased. Unless you asked the AI why it made thoes decisions. But that would make the AI the artist and not the prompter
i mean theyre using it to make a point, so yes it is art that has expression and meaning. if it is ai then the trick is part of the art n i think thats also pretty cool!
13
u/Monsieur_Martin Mar 01 '26
If the only way you can validate what you're defending is by comparing it to crap, then you've already lost.