I’d suggest that is a distinction without a difference. 

In a world that relies on visual media for information, weaponizing AI art generation is an inevitability. And that’s just in the ways we can think of now. We won’t be able to understand the full capabilities and impact of AI until it’s too late to put the genie back in the bottle. 

And the whole thing has a "Revenge of the Nerds" stench, giving tech people the idea that they can be creative without doing any of the work. Something that has clearly been on their left leaning brain (not in the political sense, obviously). 

They control 90% of the world, but they couldn't write or draw their ideal episode of Battlestar Galactica until now. They still can't, but this is the try.

It won't work, at least in the way they expect.

But... in the context of this particular series, I think it was a good idea for the intro. An idea that was obviously conceived by creative people, just executed with AI.

You would think the tech geniuses would find a way to end monotonous jobs or inequality, but no. Their goal is to take the creative jobs apparently. 

Talented potential writers and illustrators that work a barista day job are some kind of "elite" that needs to get pushed off their high horse when you hear these "AI Experts" talk.

Sad!

  

The lure of AI as applied to corporate greed (related to the SAG/AFTRA strike):

"In a statement about the strike, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) said that its proposal included “a groundbreaking AI proposal that protects actors’ digital likenesses for SAG-AFTRA members.”"

The studio proposal to background actors for use in AI art was to pay them one day's pay for a scan of their likeness (now owned by the studio), which the studio would then get to use forever for free without consent.

Uh huh.

"AI" is becoming a meaningless buzzword (surprise, I know). Nobody said Luke in THE MANDALORIAN was AI, nor Leia in RISE OF SKYWALKER and such. 

They were digital special effects, not even using deepfake technology (which also isn't AI).

Large Language Models and image generators such as Midjourney or DALL-E fall into the "AI" category but they also really ought not to. There's no "intelligence" there, at all.

When this gets regulated and the "AI" can no longer mix-n'-match existing stuff without accountability this whole thing will be over, IMHO. 

Kudos to the actors and especially the writers for taking a stand. But what we call "AI" these days will be as meaningless a term as "metaverse" and "cryptocurrency" sooner than later.

All of these use neural networks, which is as AI as AI gets.

For anyone who missed how these work, 3 Blue 1 Brown has a nice primer video assuming no previous knowledge: Link

As to what you are defining "intelligence" as, I have no idea what you are suggesting would qualify.

Because of deepfakes.

Again, ML falls under AI. Perhaps you are thinking of AGI (artificial general intelligence) or what used to be called "Strong AI".

What we call AI? If you study AI in school, you cover topics like neural networks and machine learning, the things you insist aren't AI. Anyone going into AI expecting talking robots will be disappointed by having to spend a lot of time on linear algebra and eigenvectors.

Sure, but that's the difference between cooking and ordering out.  You aren't really learning much by ordering out, and in the case of AI art, your work is being recombobulated by something that doesn't actually understand what it's looking at.  So just from an art appreciation standpoint, you're getting less than you would commissioning an artist, who makes actual choices you can try to understand.

You can learn to cook by practicing, studying, and puzzling out why things went amiss.  Same with drawing.

I'd encourage you to just pick up a pencil or brush or stylus and make mistakes. The journey is worth it.

"In the style of" works a lot better for artists with exagerrated styles, I've found. I've gotten Ai to turn out sad knock-offs of Mignola, Charles Burns, Chris Ware, but with more conventional cartoonists it just gives a generic comic book look.