I'm not going to try to woo you with cleverly curated ideological or philosophical quotes, though that would be fun, admittedly. I just don't have the time to do the research for those. I know enough about what I'm talking about to make my appeal on the basis of common sense alone. Some might say sense isn't common, but working through that is not for this publication.
This is not an anti-AI rant. I have my opinions about the technology, but will present the part of that opinion which is relevant to the preservation of human expression, since that's what this post is about.
I believe AI art and human art should be separated, sometimes. This could be at museums, art galleries, and online and offline marketplaces. My reason is simple: if such a separation does not take place, how will we tell the difference between human-made artwork and human 'prompted' (or eventually AI - prompted) artwork? This can of course be extended to music, writing, acting, etc. - all human expression.
Worse, if separation doesn't happen in some (remember, I said some) instances, I believe we eventually wont care whether the art is fully human-generated. Now, I don't think that's healthy. But am open to opinions on this (this is discussion not a treatise). If most people don't care whether or not human expression is separate from AI-expression, this conversation moves on to a different set of considerations. I'll take for granted - hopefully not in vain - that such is not the case and that people do care. So, what would separation look like?
At a number of museums, galleries, and marketplaces, it would be wise imo to have sections for human art by-hand. So, generative art would have to be excluded, to be proudly exhibited in human art by-machine along with AI. My belief is that humans, for thousands of years, have developed our artistic aesthetics and skills, and that those things, in order to be fully celebrated, must be separated. Separate to celebrate, if you will. This will not only allow markets for human art to survive, grow and thrive - especially given the probability that such art will increase in rarity - but will allow for full appreciation of human art-by machine. A true and balanced win-win.
I must add at this point that I believe no art or expression by machine is sans human input. We programmed the machine so that, even when capable of completely expressing itself artistically with no apparent input from us, machines are eternally indebted to us in the way we are to the Higher Power (that's my view; no offense intended if it's not yours). Yet, again, there need be separation for - if I am allowed this phrase - full and accurate celebration of human artistic expression.
Thanks for considering these things. I wish to hear your opinion.
Lastly, two artworks: one AI; the other non-. Or perhaps both are one, or the other. Can you tell? And does it matter to you?
Artfully and cryptographically Yours,
Elated Pixel