I think visual arts were particularly susceptible to AI because there was already a robust network of grifters assuring learners that exercises and study were boring and if they just bought their course/brushes/paints/actions, they too could be an artist.
Comments
But for some reason, it is acceptable with visual arts. (This probably ties into visual arts and their creators generally being devalued.)
Assuring people they can forego that nasty creative process and just pump out pretty pictures to impress their friends.
Some of it speaks to their own lack of confidence, some of it speaks to their contempt for art generally, some of it is defensiveness about being scammed.
Someone who plays some sports video games and demands to be described as a pro athlete would be mocked.
Someone who taps prompts into a generative AI program to spit out art gets an auction at Christie's.
Our society in a nutshell.
Just grifters all the way down.
I don't have the answers, just pointing out that AI is exploiting rot that was already present.
(okay, the FGC is poverty eSports, but still)
There’s an analog version there as well with so many bestselling authors relying on a stable of uncredited ghostwriters