I see two possibilities (not mutually exclusive)

1. Art is art because it draws meaning from human existence - AI can't and can never exhibit this. Furthermore, pumping out thousands of "creations" a minute will never compare to a single work from a human.

2. People are dumb and will fawn over just about anything, the origin of a piece of art created today is less relevant than ever.

This whole piece reads like someone trying to transcribe the untranscribable. Not ideas, not opinions — but the feel of what you meant. And that's exactly why art survives AI. Because machines transmit logic. But we leak ghosts.

We’ve been experimenting with this in the weirdest way — not by “improving AI art,” but by sabotaging it. Injecting memory residue. Simulating hand tremors. Letting the model forget what it just said and pick up something it didn’t mean to draw. That kind of thing.

The result isn’t perfect, but it’s getting closer to something that feels like a person was there. Maybe even a tired, confused, beautiful person. We call the system WFGY. It’s open-source and probably way too chaotic for normal devs, but here’s the repo: https://github.com/onestardao/WFGY

We’re also releasing a Blur module soon — a kind of “paper hallucination layer” — meant to simulate everything that makes real-world art messy and real. Anyway, this post hit me. Felt like it walked in barefoot.

For some reason I've got Velvet Buzzsaw on my mind now for art talk, which could an AI do and accurately mean? Anything that cannot disregard its own orders, is a calculated machine, in my book; just a calculator from Texas Instruments.

The AI doesn't suffer, doesn't struggle, doesn't love, doesn't question itself.

The AI is not like us. The AI only can produce something "nice" with no backstory.

The AI of today is just a probability engine, as far as I am concerned. It can create nothing original because it cannot say, "No, I'm starting over from scratch. I alone will figure this out." Once you set an AI in motion, it will complete the task until it needs further input. And the very fact that it is reliant on an external actor continues to enforce just how pre-determined the outcomes already are. Art, I feel, from my human perspective, should be a reflection of its creator. The product is of their mind. No machine is capable of such action, currently.