His analogy works perfectly fine and is actually incredibly apt. Photography did threaten a large number of painters livelihoods.

After the grand scale AI is. But that’s more a matter of how things are just on a grander scale as we have become more connected in more optimized as time has gone on.

Technological improvements tend to be larger than those that preceded them when it comes to replacement and displacement.

And if you’re going to put the bar of art as simply eliciting a human emotion reaction or feeling. Then by your own definition AI generated art is art.

It generates all sorts of emotions, reactions, feelings, Thoughts, Arguments, considerations and philosophizing all across the world.

Ai art has probably been one of the largest points in the last couple hundred years in which this many people have genuinely stopped and considered. What is art.

I’m not a big fan of AI art at all, but I’m also not a big fan of trying to discredit something just because you don’t emotionally agree with it. I would wholeheartedly agree that 99.99% of all AI art is low effort slop and absolute trash. But I wouldn’t discredit anyone who actually attempts to do something legitimate with it.

Functionally the entire argument against AI art being art is the same one against photography or modern art not being art.