"Artists" are currently trying to create false scarcity, not totally unlike the DeBeers/diamonds false scarcity.

Historically, Artists have often had (mostly) uncredited assistants that handled a lot of the grunt work. This is particularly common, IME, for physical media artists that do large sculptures and similar pieces. "The Artist" will do the initial design, and then "artists" working under their direction will do a lot of cutting and welding, for example.

AI is upending a lot of this because it is letting more people become Artists in the sense of bringing a vision into reality via the use of various external helpers.

In the end all visual artists are just manipulating how photons hit our eyes, and there are lots of ways to make that happen pleasantly.

> Historically, Artists have often had (mostly) uncredited assistants that handled a lot of the grunt work. This is particularly common, IME, for physical media artists that do large sculptures and similar pieces. "The Artist" will do the initial design, and then "artists" working under their direction will do a lot of cutting and welding, for example.

I'd say the right thing to do in such cases would be to credit the whole team, like movies do when the credits roll, rather than conclude that the term "artist" is meaningless anyway because some people take credit for the work of others.

a false scarcity? sometimes this site makes me feel like i'm talking to aliens