you keep saying morals; I'm pretty sure you don't know what that means.

that's not the point... the point is that AI doesn't know what the fuck it's doing.

I know. that's not a tool.

again, there are instances, like resampling, depending on the algorithm, where "AI" (misnomer) can be used as a tool.

what people generally mean when they say "AI art" is not that.

because if you teach me to pronounce some japanese words without teaching me what it means, i may say them perfectly, and even trick some people who don't see my face into thinking I'm speaking native japanese, even though i don't know what the fuck I'm saying. the fact that i tricked some people into thinking otherwise does not make me a japanese person.

so people ask this question and they get engagement

there's a difference between not having a unique style and physically being unable to have a style because you have next to no input in the process.

i didn't say knowing the intent is needed. i believe in death of the author, so that isn't relevant.

the intent to create art is, however, needed. the fountain is art, but before it became the fountain, the urinal itself wasn't.

the "people" you're talking about were talking about tools. I'm talking about intent. Just because you compare two arguments that use similar words doesn't mean the arguments are similar.

of all the things you could say after "car park cool", this has to be the most ridiculous.

people inside:

🎶🎷💃🕺🎺🎵

"these fucking kids, i tell you... they're evil!" —Ted after getting caught again, probably