both of you are wrong and low-iq simpletons who have zero understand what ai is. there is no "magical dust" that makes human art uniquely better. it has everything to do with the difference between the neurological modus operandi of a human experience and an ai's equivalent. what does this mean? it means that ai is currently too dumb to overtake human art. but the reason ai is too dumb is because its neurological structures are at their infancy. ai has a lot of processing power to accumulate more data than a human brain can, but it lacks the neurological complexity to process that data same way a human can. however, this is merely a question of mechanical deficiencies, and it is not a question of magic.  ai will creat better art than humans can, once we reach "event horizon" in the si route, which is already being superceded as a priority over agi.  there are of course other topics to mention, for example how ai's art is influenced a digital dataset, while human art is influenced by a physical/material dataset - but all of this is only a question of datasets, which will also be remedied within ~10 years time.
Lithuania