The brute forcing doesn’t happen when you generate the art. It happens when you train the model.

So it’s the same as a human - they also generate art until they get something that “looks right” during training. How is it different when an AI does it?

Human inspiration and creativity meanwhile is an intuitive process. And we understand why 2+2 is four.

You’re using more words without defining them.

Writing a piece of code that takes two values and sums them, does not mean the code comprehends math.

But we’re not writing code to generate art. We’re writing code to train a model to generate art. As I’ve already mentioned, NNs provably can build an accurate model of whatever you’re training - how is this not a form of comprehension?

In the same way, training a model to generate sound or visuals, does not mean it understands the human experience.

Please prove you need to understand the human experience to be able to generate meaningful art.

As for current models generating different result for the same prompt… no. They don’t. They generate variations, but the same prompt won’t get you Dalí in one iteration, then Monet in the next.

Of course they can, depending on your prompt and temperature.