> This communicative property of art is irreducible to its extrinsic properties (like color, form, etc), and instead concerns the significance of the artwork to

> This communicative property of art is irreducible to its extrinsic properties (like color, form, etc), and instead concerns the significance of the artwork to the artist and their communication of that significance to the viewer. To steal some terminology from analytic philosophy, let us call these latter properties the “intrinsic” properties of art to separate them from the merely extrinsic properties of art. While I agree that there is a fundamental difference in meaning between human and AI art, and also about how dismal the prospect of a world in which most art we enjoy is AI-generated, I feel the author is cheating a bit by ignoring half of the “intrinsic” properties. That is, art is also about (to me, mainly about) the experience it produces in the viewer. This intrinsic property is not affected by whether the author is AI, or even a natural process. Though I agree it would be unusual to call the Niagara Falls 'art'.