- Apparently Nicki Minaj recently used AI-generated art for a marketing campaign, and her fans, in turn, have been expanding on the "Gag City Universe" with their own generated images. It went viral, so I guess it's "working", but as an X (sigh) user, wrote: > - You know what I realized about AI images in your marketing? It sends out the message that you've got no budget. It's the digital equivalent of wearing an obviously fake Chanel bag. Your whole brand immediately appears feeble and impoverished. - This might be harsh, but it feels true. Instead of investing in one or two good pieces of media for promotions, **AI-generated content feels like the equivalent of fast fashion**. It signals that **your brand is prioritizing the** _**performance**_ **of story and messaging**, without the financial and energy investment of creating something authentic. - It feels tacky and is recognizable as mass-produced junk, because [[{6.1a3} artificial intelligence can never replace the human experience|AI can't create anything]]. - On the other hand, not everyone who uses AI-generated art in their business is doing so out of laziness. Is good AI art more appealing than bad human art? Is there room to be more graceful to small business owners _can't_ pay someone else to make their vision come to life? Especially since [[{6.4b} how will our feelings about ai art change over time]]?