Why Artists Are Lying About AI
Recently, someone posted something on X.
It was a painting.
It looked like any other painting.
It looked good.
Nothing crazy.
Then someone replied with something like:
“I just generated an image in the style of a Monet painting using AI.
Please describe, in as much detail as possible, what makes this inferior to a real Monet painting.”
And all the artists in the comments started going crazy.
They were like:
“No, this painting is horrible.”
“This is obviously AI.”
“It has no soul.”
“It has no creativity.”
“This could never be real art.”
And then it turned out the painting wasn’t AI.
The guy made it himself.
And this is the thing people need to understand.
This doesn’t prove AI art is bad.
It proves a lot of artists can’t even tell the difference.
A lot of these people are lying to you.
And they know they’re lying.
They don’t actually care about quality anymore.
They care about virtue signaling.
They care about having the moral high ground.
They care about being seen as “real artists” who are bravely standing against AI.
But they don’t care about adapting.
They don’t care about getting better.
They don’t care about using the tools.
They just care about being morally right.
And they’re not.
Because if you can’t even tell whether something was made by AI or by a human, then the whole argument starts falling apart.
You can say you don’t like AI.
You can say you don’t want to use it.
That’s fine.
But don’t sit there pretending it’s always obvious.
Don’t pretend it’s always soulless.
Don’t pretend it’s always low quality.
Because clearly, you can’t even tell.
And the brutal truth is this:
Nobody is going to pay you forever just because you refused to adapt.
The world is changing.
The tools are changing.
And at some point, you either adapt…
or you lose.
So stop being a sore loser.
Stop pretending AI is automatically bad.
And start asking the actual question:
“How do I use this without making myself irrelevant?”