One of the many problems with AI is that it doesn't actually create - it merely recycles.

For example, it may begin an image as white noise, and then progressively refine it so that the error measure of the image falls below some given level.

The valuation of the error value is based on labeled training data that was supplied by people, using artwork created by people.

Often, that artwork was flat out stolen, with no profits being returned to the creators of the original artwork.

This holds true for AIs like code assistants, which have trawled through huge amounts of code, regardless of the license associated with that code. And it's the same for programs that correct grammar, or write term papers. The data comes from somewhere, but there's no attribution on the final product.

Expertise in a field comes not just from knowledge of what has happened, but what direction that points. I've got plenty of books on orchestration. While they have some value, the problem is that styles change, and they no longer reflect current practice.

By embracing AI of this sort, we devalue the works of artists who have innovated, and hand profits over to corporations who only seek to reap profit off the works of those artists while returning none of those profits to them.

-- David Cuny
My virtual singer development blog

Vocal control, you say. Never heard of it. Is that some kind of ProTools thing?