Your reply really encapsulate the technocratic mindset of some people in the AI community.
It's quite ironic that without humanity there would not be any AI to speak of. Nor would there be any artworks to "copy" from.
We're not special but that does not make the AI superior or better.
No one in the Ai community here will have anything to say about UBI or whatever. We should discuss about AI but I refuse to adhere to the naive mindset that we have anything to say about how it's going to develop.
Corporations/private interests will decide. Not you or me.

Ok, no art is not created in a vacuum but that's not the problem here.
Humans need to process the art through their senses, to the brain, then, eventually learn and apply their skills to re-create something new.
It usually takes time to become a good artist and even more so to really be original.

AI is a great technological feat but it's as good as the input fed into it.
Machine driven creation is possibly going to replace artists because of the speed of execution and the amount of works that can be created.
This only benefits capitalism at large not the individual creator.
That's where a lot of the AI community fails to really question the motives and implications behind it.
There aren't enough hours in a day to watch, play, read, listen to all the available content and people want more ?? If you want quantity over quality that's up to you I guess.

To put it frankly, it won't happen.
Not only because of the physical impracticalities but also the psychological cost that it would entail.
Body and mind are a necessary tool in the evolution of humankind since the beginning of civilisation. There are too much unknown about how the brain works within a body that it's not feasible to try to separate the two and say we'll be just a brain in a computer simulation la di da.
Makes for nice sci-fi but not for a realistic prediction about the future at the moment.