[happytoexplain]

Subjective vs objective. Also, analogies are almost always weak rhetorical distractions. The conversation just becomes about the differences between the two things. If you want to state an opinion about X, form the thought about X, rather than just pointing to Y and asserting they're the same.

[KK7NIL]

> Subjective vs objective.

We've already reached the point where GAI art is extremely difficult to distinguish from human art and at a fraction of that cost.

I'd say that's pretty objective and it's hard to even leave room for subjective interpretation when it's so hard to tell them apart.

> Also, analogies are almost always weak rhetorical distractions.

I wasn't trying to start a discussion with them. To say GAI will never be better than humans at art when we already know what we know today isn't a good faith logical argument, it's a tautological appeal to emotion.

[johnnyanmac]

>where GAI art is extremely difficult to distinguish from human art and at a fraction of that cost.

And this logic is why people don't understand how to make good game art. generating an 2d animation or real time 3d model that properly deforms is multiple magnitudes different from fooling some tiktok users with a static image in isolation. even composing a still scene will quickly reveal the lmitations of generating art for your visual novel.

Wielding a camera doesn't make you a cinematographer that can sell a movie. Generating a few realistic-ish images does not make you an artist that can sell a game.