>>150966432
>That's why I don't understand why you went into problems that are only applicable to actual cookies.
It was my own metaphor for art that's "inedible", or not suited to your preferences, or a bad product from an artform you typically like. And unlike homemade cookies, most of the art you enjoy is not made directly for you either. It's actually meant to have mass appeal, kind of like store-bought cookies.
>people can't "make" AI. Entering a prompt isn't "making"
Eh. One of the things you can ABSOLUTELY guarantee with AI is that what you're getting is one-for-one, because AI can't duplicate shit to save its life. So, if you consider writing to be an artform (which it objectively is), then typing an AI prompt is a microscopic level of creativity used to make a unique product. Obviously though, people who think themselves painters because they know how to press keys are just delusional.
>Even ancients marveled at hand-hewn statues and spat at hacks who used plaster and forms to make them.
That's kind of my issue. Who gets to gatekeep what counts as "real art", especially when ancient artists would laugh at the high-tech methods we use to create? We've had the "this isn't real music/cinema/etc." argument thousands of times. I'm not saying AI is the same as everything else, but people usually just bend the knee and stop caring about this stuff after a while. Life goes on.
>Only fools appreciate purely the result, "we must lower ourselves to the common denominator" isn't an argument
It's not an argument, it's a reality. Everyone experiences art, but most people aren't artistically minded.
>I don't care about their mental fortitude as people, I only care about them as artists.
You're a real saint.
>before you could just search, now you have to enter extra parameters and sift
Typing -"ai" is the MOST I need to do to omit that shit from searches. How are you wanking about the integrity of time spent creating when you're getting filtered by Google Images?
