This is not the first time it has happened: nearly two centuries ago, photography was long considered “non-art,” accused of being a mere mechanical reproduction—often with arguments that are literally identical to those made by some AI critics today. Yet, no one now doubts that figures like Man Ray or Diane Arbus created true works of art. Even the auctioning of photographs, a phenomenon that seems obvious today, was initially the subject of heated debate. The pattern repeats itself identically: in 1862, a group of academics and artists promoted a petition to “contain” the rise of photography, and today we are witnessing a similar initiative against this auction. And, as happened in the 19th century, history once again tells us that, in the long run, what matters is the creativity of the person wielding the new tool, not the tool itself.

I hope the debate will shift to more pressing issues: not the legitimacy of AI as a means of artistic expression, but the ethical, social, and economic aspects that these technologies raise. The “artistic use” of AI was the easy part: as with previous innovations, this chapter will soon close, even though the voices of the most ardent opponents—who are dwindling as usage spreads—are growing louder. But allowing ourselves to be distracted by rearguard battles that were already outdated at the beginning of the 20th century will not help us address the critical aspects of these new technologies.