I don’t think that’s quite the right analogy. You’re not talking to humans to get your images. You are using a tool that’s designed to generate images from written language.

A better analogy would be an invention of a mechanical cook. While it will sometimes make edible food if you just give it regular language instructions, to get something truly tasty and interesting out of it you need to learn how it works and even understand its inner functioning. And while doing that may or may not make you “a cook”, it does give you the ability to produce new interesting food and share it with others, which is useful&cool in its own right.

Given how vague most definitions of “art” are, I feel like we can call some AI-generated stuff a form of art (but that’s not a strong opinion of mine). I don’t think we should gatekeep what “art” is - if it allows you to express your emotions and feelings and share it with others, I say why not call it “art”? It’s definitely not the same as painting or drawing or photography, but it can produce interesting and/or aesthetically pleasing results, and the results improve with skill.

After reading the first sentence I wasn’t sure if you were anti-AI “too lazy to learn how to paint” or pro-AI “too lazy to learn prompt engineering” :D

As for your actual comment, while I’m also generally against AI, I feel like a shift in perspective is inevitable and has already happened to an extent.

I think it makes sense to compare image genAI to photography. It also made it far easier for people without “artistic talent” to produce images. Same as with AI, it is technically a purely mechanical process, a machine designed to make images. Also similar to AI, most of those images were kind of trash. However, it soon became its own separate art form, with its own language and a set of rules for “what makes a picture good”. Would you say that photographers are not artists because they use a mechanical (or, nowadays, electronic) contraption for their art?

I feel like something similar is happening with AI. There are be certain kinds of AI-generated images that people like, and it will take increasing amounts of effort and skill to generate new, interesting ones. As time goes on and the hype wears off a bit, there will be a relatively small community of hardcore AI prompt engineers making something novel and interesting, while most people just use AI for practical purposes or just fun, similar to photography.

The main differences between photography and genAI are the insane amount of energy required for generating batches of images, and the fact that it steals from human artists to produce its results. This is the reason I’m opposed to the current AI hype, not just because it’s mechanical.

There are some stops where the bus always stops, and others where you have to signal the driver to stop (known as request stops). You will typically find the first kind in high density areas like cities, and the other in suburbs or in the countryside (there are even “stop areas” in some very rural places, where the driver officially must stop anywhere along it when asked).

The same applies to trains too, although request stops are not as common as they are for buses (and I don’t know of any stop areas for trains)

I think almost everywhere there are regular stops and request stops. How much each type is utilized, and how well they are differentiated, is what differs regionally.

Buses in Europe tend to be pretty good for this, there is an announcement that the next stop is a request stop and you have to press the stop button to disembark. (It is also explained on the information screen). Gets a bit annoying if you use the bus regularly, but makes it much better for new users.