I’m sorry that all your responses have been programmers calling you a luddite and implying that artists are either hopeless amateurs or petite-bourgeois profit-seeking dilletantes. People seem unaware that existing and historical socialist countries have usually provided better support for artists and a more socially beneficial outlet. As some have rightly pointed out, high art under capitalism is little more than a physical NFT, a plaything for the bourgeois. In comparison, the DPRK is well known for its artists and sculptors who are hired around the world to create public art such as statues and monuments. AI-generated art represents the maximum level of commodification for art and specifically in the case of art this produces something deeply unsatisfactory to many, myself included. The reason is that art is at its base a form of communication between the artist and their audience, and in the case of performing arts this relationship is mediated by an interpreter. As a human being with subjective experience, what we find fulfilling in all art is this communication: we are experiencing some meaningful idea, emotion, through the artistic logic of its creator. The artwork also exists as a snapshot of the historical moment around its creation. And the act of creating art is as important as the role of the audience. Art does not really have a practical use value outside of this deeply human, subjective, irrational case, and so when AI is used to generate a finished product, or it is the primary source of the idea, the commodified artform that results is stripped of any historical context around its creation, and there is no one trying communicate from the other side, trying to express something from within. There is only the consumer and infinite stream of indistinguishable pseudo-art.