We've already reached the point where GAI art is extremely difficult to distinguish from human art and at a fraction of that cost.
I'd say that's pretty objective and it's hard to even leave room for subjective interpretation when it's so hard to tell them apart.
> Also, analogies are almost always weak rhetorical distractions.
I wasn't trying to start a discussion with them. To say GAI will never be better than humans at art when we already know what we know today isn't a good faith logical argument, it's a tautological appeal to emotion.