What's your consensus on AI-art?

I don't really like the look of AI art to be honest, like the general style of it. Also I value the time and effort artists put on their art and I think that's a very important aspect of the art piece itself. It doesn't matter how good it looks, the reason why it was painted matters more to me.

I hate it so much. It should not be normalized and should not be the future of art, and hopefully it isn't. The definition of art is literally a creative expression that makes you feel emotions. Robots aren't capable of doing that, and mimicking what other humans have already created is simply not art. AI will never be creative enough to make a visionary and meaningful art piece, and those who love AI art only do so because they think they are standing up for something, they know AI art is horrendous, they just love the idea not paying for artists to make them "beautiful" pieces.

To me as an Artist for the last 18+ yrs going on 19 etc, (and who does use AI occasionally as a pass time hobby), I see AI as just another tool or reference resource in an Digital Artist's Tool Kit, no different than me taking photographs with my mobile phone and using some of images I captured and drawing Illustrations out of that.

For other people, they may see AI as an outlet to express their thoughts and ideas instantly - like say if you're mute or have a sever disability (like eye sight problems) or you find socializing with someone too difficult, one can use AI to help them communicate their thoughts more effectively. 

I'm all for it either way, so long as its used for good / not malicious intent.

And of course as an Artist for so long, I had the misfortune of seeing the anti AI debates via Threads, - (NONE of it I agree with and most of the anti AI crowd I tend to block from my socials, cuz they're negative energy, unethical behavior such as bullying and sending death threats etc - is not what I want on my socials or personal life) > so in regards to the "speculative part" that you listed, I will say the following > Artstyles are not subject to Copyright, so if people are claiming that AI is "stealing styles", know that that is lunacy talking. If anyone bashes with the excuse of "Artstyle theft", know that that is insecurity screaming (on the attacker's part)

Additionally all raw content generated by AI, be it images, vids, music, or text, is not subject to any copywrite claims either. Sure you can say you rendered it - that is a fact if you had to spend hours via your phone or computer, typing out text descriptions and trying to generate best looking image that expresses your ideas), but to say like you and you alone "own it" ie nobody else can use it or do anything with it, yeah you won't be able to have that privilege - so this is why most professionals (including myself), would recommend that you use AI stuff as reference when doing your Creative works. You can use it as part of your Creative Production Process, but not as a final, finished product itself.

Will AI replace anybody in terms of Art/ Can Art become a future Artform (like Photography)? I would say it depends on how it was used and what for - but there is potential yes, but not by itself alone (for reasons I listed above.) You would still need someone who has the skills both in linguistics and Art/ Creativity to guide the AI bots/ programs to make content that you are specifically seeking that best captures your ideas, and then figure out how to edit or rebrand the content for public presentation and consumption. Ai in a nut shell would force you to upgrade your skill sets to be better at what you already do or can do and more, but some people don't like the idea of self improvement, so they partake in anti AI rehtoric.