Wait, we've gone from "pay the local artists" because AI shows you're "lazy and cheap" and "don't care about your brand".
And now whatever my 7-year-old draws is good enough.
My only conclusion reading these threads is that folks come in with their mind made up, and will argue absolutely anything so long as it amounts to "AI bad".
If ChatGPT churns out your ad you've signaled nothing. And that's obviously why you can criticize AI for every imaginable reason. That's indeed the difference and why people, regardless of how 'good' your AI art will be, will attempt to hide it, because it defeats the purpose of advertising as such.
Maybe the reality is a lot of people have different feelings about this. Most people don't care and I'm mostly engaging with the loudest detractors, each with their own reason for hating AI.
Maybe every person you talk to is autistic with no sense for creativity at all. Thats what most of this dogshit website consists of. Programmers with no values, no creativity, no friends, no life and no self awareness. People who actually should be replaced by AI because they lack human values.
yes that is the reality, but what I was saying was is that the abstract reason for that is what's called costly signalling in economics, biology or even religious studies.
When you want to display, advertise or communicate to earn yourself trust, it must cost something. Whether that's proof of work, or money, or reputation or skill, what all AI criticisms have in common is that AI costs nothing. Signalling values isn't 'another thing', it's what underlies every motivation for an ad or display and the better your AI tools get the less of a costly signal it is.