If A.I. took the place of musicians, would you listen to it?

We will have other problems after WW III in a situation of deteriorating climate, no one will even think about AI then. But we will need robots, no doubt of that.

@inna Of course, AI is a huge energy user, so I'm glad you mentioned climate.

A.I. use is directly responsible for carbon emissions from non-renewable electricity and for the consumption of millions of gallons of fresh water, and it indirectly boosts impacts from building and maintaining the power-hungry equipment on which A.I. runs. As tech companies seek to embed high-intensity A.I. into everything from resume-writing to kidney transplant medicine and from choosing dog food to climate modeling, they cite many ways A.I. could help reduce humanity’s environmental footprint. But legislators, regulators, activists, and international organizations now want to make sure the benefits aren’t outweighed by A.I.’s mounting hazards.

hilde45, I am a well-known "eco-fascist", as someone called me once.

Let's enjoy music in all its variety and forms. Without AI and brain implants.

Have never had to think about music "not" being created by a real person so this line of thinking is new to all of us, I presume.  And it's a good question.

Right now, I'm leaning toward not caring whether a piece is created by an AI or human, as long as its's just music or a fluff pop piece.  However, if the song's lyrics are hauntingly emotional, I wouldn't listen to the song if it was AI generated.  I'd want that to be from someone's lived experience.

@snilf That was a doozie of a paper professor.  Thanks for the Nabokov scholarly refference too. ("Pale Fire" one of my all time beloved books).

AI in the hands of evil doers is/will be calamitous. Hard music to face. But who listens?