This article overgeneralises about art by subsuming all art under the category of visual art and more specifically digital visual art. The question of whether A

This article overgeneralises about art by subsuming all art under the category of visual art and more specifically digital visual art. The question of whether AI is art poison is not well formed because of this assumption as you are just talking about a significant but small section of the real art market. I agree in relation to both non-digital visual arts (kind of) and digital visual arts (especially). This may also apply to CAD, game design, ui/ux and 3D animation too. So it is a big deal. However, there's no real AI replacement metric if your art is outside of these, very digitally orientated categories. A big shark in formaldehyde, psychedelic peeing reindeer, silver bromide developing on a metal canvas, titanium pellets that roll through a game machine etc (e.g. all recent artworks). They're all art, mostly good (at least to many people in the art market or critics), and AI is in not really relevant in terms of labour replacement.