As I see it AI can absolutely find innovative solutions, but only if you can clearly and explicitly define the problem it needs to solve.
As I see it AI can absolutely find innovative solutions, but only if you can clearly and explicitly define the problem it needs to solve.
Isn't this reminiscent of the arguments that were made at the dawn of photography as an art form? Some were afraid that portraiture was finished as an art form, but we got Impressionism, Cubism, and a host of other innovative forms to take its place. Never mind that portraiture was not in fact killed by photography, nor was any other visual form.
Others swore that cameras and film would never be valid implements of art, but they got awfully quiet when Adams and Weston and others showed up on the scene, and you don't hear much from them at all these days.
If nobody was afraid of AI -- if nobody was screaming bloody murder about how urgent it was to stop it -- only then could we safely say that it will have no role or relevance in art.