> AI artists offer only the imitation of art Doesn't this depend on the "beholder's" definition of art? In some contexts I want art to say something meaningful

> AI artists offer only the imitation of art Doesn't this depend on the "beholder's" definition of art? In some contexts I want art to say something meaningful about the human condition. AI art can't do that (at least today and maybe ever). In some contexts I want art to be beautiful or perhaps just decorative. I think AI art can already do that, at least sometimes. When it's successful, then it meets my definition of "art" in that context. In other contexts I may need art that illustrates an idea or conveys a concept. AI art can already do that to. Thus, I don't agree with the premise "AI artists only offer the imitation art" at least in some contexts.