Well, that’s exactly what I’m talking about - new unproven tech that created more problems that it solved. It didn’t “solve” art since that is meaningless witho

Well, that’s exactly what I’m talking about - new unproven tech that created more problems that it solved. It didn’t “solve” art since that is meaningless without a human artist. Instead, it stole popular concepts and is regurgitating it without any originality or thought put into it, and then used “instead” of real artistical works by those who don’t really understand art, but just need “content”. In other words, merely copying/reproducing something is emphatically not art. The same thing happened with traditional (painting) art and photography - the latter didn’t really replace it but just supplanted it in the areas where one wasn’t really looking for art but for mere reproduction of reality. And then over time, photography itself has evolved into art, since people have learned how to channel their inner self through it, and aimed at quality instead of “quantity” (and unlike the former, the latter by itself became trivial). I don’t see the same happening with generative models quite yet (heck, they didn’t really replace photography either!)