Highly subjective comment. Art is not something that is either "good" or "not good". It can hold value to the creator intrinsically. Like a kids crayon scribbles.

They like it. And it was a good excuse to work with new tech. Why poo poo on it?

If they like it, then it’s not garbage for them. Mission accomplished. What you think of art on a stranger’s wall isn’t really the point — it’s more so about the technology behind it.

I suppose you could be indirectly commenting about how you think the technology does a bad job generating art, but there are better ways to say it.

Good, so in order to produce good AI-aided graphics the producers will have to become critics, arts experts, with the important side effect of personal elevation and the collective gain of society. "Wins" on all sides.

Update: three minutes later, it seems that somebody did not get the irony.

What a useful and nuanced critique. Thanks!