Well, I guess for these people general AI already exists, or at least AI capable of producing art. Just take a random pattern, imbue it with whatever meaning you please, and treat it as artistic intelligence. With this approach, any innovation (at least as far as producing art goes) does not carry any value beyond novelty value - if /dev/random has everything one ever would need in art, then what's the difference between any new sophisticated model and just another dump of output of /dev/random?
You're asking that rhetorically, assuming people will just agree there's a difference because a human artist did it and a computer doing it isn't an artist, but you know a lot of people would be happy to take one of those forks.