Regarding Terminology When Discussing AI Generated Images/Content

Recently I came to a realization regarding the term "AI Art." Attaching the word "art" to the concept of images generated by Artificial Intelligence creates a certain sort of connotation. I believe that the word Art itself has a sort of humanity associated with it. 

Art is handcrafted, even when done digitally. It holds emotion, passion, love, self-expression - human concepts that a machine will never be able to experience or recreate. AI image generation steals from a database. Generative Artificial Intelligence is a form of machine learning in which you need to train your machine to "learn" to do something specific. Humans are involved in training the AI and prompting it to generate something new, but there's nothing human or artistic about the final product. There is no such thing as AI Art.

When you refer to an artificially generated image as "AI Art," you're suggesting that the product is art, that it has any sort of humanity to it at all. The phrase has become very common, which reinforces that connotation. I believe that we should stop referring to AI Generated Images this way. 

As an artist myself, I am strongly against the idea of AI generated "art." I do support other uses of Artificial Intelligence, but not the forms that involve the theft of genuine art and creation to humor the greed and laziness of others. If you're so in need of an idea that you don't have the skills to create yourself, you should either commission someone who can or learn to do it yourself. 

The implications that come with how AI has progressed in recent times is honestly quite scary, and perpetuating the idea that there's any sort of humanity associated with it will only further undermine the matter. AI generated images are soulless amalgamations of the works of others.

Even if you are against the concept and speaking out against AI Generated Images, you should not refer to the products as art. Do not let them think they're artists. They're far from it.