Raw LLM Responses

While there is a lot of truth to what you said, especially the "person behind the art" bit - I personally also think that "human made" aspect of it is very important - there are some caveats. I am aware I'm kinda playing devils advocate here, but still, I'd like to say it out loud. It might also be that I'm a robot and don't understand art either. 1) As a hobby artist of 3 years, I am of an opinion some art pieces are objectively worse than others. Not every two art pieces are comparable, but one can have objectively worse anatomy/pose/perspective/color-sheme/what-not. Objectively speaking, quite a number of Picasso paintings are rather bad. Not all of them, quite a few have great gesture to them ("Seated Nude" looks freaking amazing), but still. It's good "because it's Picasso". And in a way, that's what people sometimes don't like about art nowadays - where people would claim any garbage to be "art" simply because there's a big name behind it (looking at you, Robert Gober). 2) I think there is certain value to the art-piece, without the artist attached to it. When you go to a doctor, and there is a painting on a wall - you don't really care about who drew it and why. It's there to make walls not look monotone. There is a certain breaking point where the art piece stops being about the story behind it and becomes "just an eye candy". I would say by that logic AI art should literally cost pennies and be valued far less than something "human-made", yet I don't like saying it has no purpose whatever.