/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6706234

>>6126389
>Yet people are still able to create beauty and good nonetheless.
No.
The only thing of value about that is whether it can be consumed or not.
Consumed as a part of a media franchise or consumed to jerk off;
physically
>as in actual masturbation and porn consumption
or mentally
>as in pretending to being able to understand abstract concepts so you feel good about your smooth brain
Everything is created for consumption, every piece of art is justified only for being able to be consumed.

Anything that isn't "consumable" isn't seen as art and if you're disagreeing then you're either lying or seriously are ignorant and should not even talk about this shit.

You're really getting mad at one Anon, for simply saying shit about the inevitable death of the arts at the hands of AI.

Artists deserve much worse than being rightfully replaced by AI.
Do you think normies will give a shit?
Do you really believe they will not use FREE SHIT to get whatever shitty fetish images they want?
>Inb4 bb--b-but AI cant do porn
Won't be long.
Retards and porn addicts will go any length to get the coom they want, FAST and for FREE.

That Anon is just throwing salt into the gaping tranny hole of the average artists and it seems to rile them up because they know their time is near its end.

And people ARE a fucking plague and should gtfo my planet or die.
You do not even know how much i wanted corona to be actually real.