AI Art - Nice Try, Mr. Hopper

I made the mistake of going to the original posters tweet to see what people are talking about. And I am most certain he is being a troll stating something along the lines of "Hopper was good but the AI has added more and captured the city-scape of what they were originally going for." The kind of arguments he's pulling and challenging people with is quite invocative of trying to rustle peoples jimmies.

Ultimately many comments felt like a screaming match you you're "dumb for not understanding the original context" countered with you're "silly for thinking an empty painting being sad is worth something."
Like I feel no one wants to discuss the fact that AI art doesn't have intent to make pieces evocative of anything it's just following a script, that we assign value and meaning to things and how different people place value on the same object, taking away different things while value different parts of it.

"d ner"