[SoftTalker]

I think specifically in the area of creative "products" such as art and music you have to think about the customer as well. I have zero interest in AI-created art or music. None. The value of art is its humanity; its expression of the artist's message, vision, and passion. AI doesn't have that, so it's not of any interest to me.

I don't know how many custoners feel the same way, but I won't be purchasing any AI art or music or knowingly giving it any of my attention.

[astrange]

The AI is a tool the human used to make it. Sometimes clumsily, but sometimes they write poems as text prompts and it's an illustration, or things like that. If an AI is making and selling art by itself, it's probably become sentient and not patronizing it would be speciesism.

Although personally, I think using "AI art" to create impossible photographs is more interesting and doesn't compete with illustrators as much.

[esrauch]

I think it's an interesting perspective but I will be very surprised if it's one that is common when this becomes more of a real choice. If there's two mp3s and one of them is more enjoyable to listen to, very few people will stick with the song they enjoy less because it's not AI generated.

Maybe a parallel would be furniture; there are people who buy hand crafted furniture but it's kind of a luxury. Most people just have Ikea and wouldn't pay more for the same (or have less good furniture) just to get some artisanal dinner table chair.

[somethingreen]

How would you even know? Vast majority of art you don't purchase directly, but as a part of some product. At most you get a line in the credits and what's stopping anyone from inventing a pseudonym for AI.

[oriolid]

> I have zero interest in AI-created art or music.

I'm afraid in near future we will all bombarded with AI-created music, art and text whether we want it or not.