We can try to prevent plagiarism and improve our detection of it, but there's nothing wrong or disappointing with the fact that people prefer to listen to Bill Gates than a random blogger.
I think the tragedy is that the attention doesn't follow quality or value, it follows fame and gimmicks. In your example, Bill Gates's stupidest brain farts will get 1000x more positive attention that an objectively-better tour-de-force that almost anyone else posts.
It is, but also... welcome to life. This is how it works. What determines success is very often more about things other than the quality of the product.
For evidence, just look at the most popular products at the store. Very rarely are they at the top of the quality scale.
> It is, but also... welcome to life. This is how it works.
So what? That it works that way doesn't make it any less of a tragedy* or any more fair.
* The word chosen by someone else upthread.
Focus on the better aspects of life. Take care of your loved ones. Do your best to improve your local community. Contribute to a better state of the world, no matter how small the contribution may be. Pray to a higher being if you believe in one. That's ultimately all you can do.
I think this is actually perfect and there is no tragedy.
For the record, the type of personal recommendation I'm talking about cannot be viral, in any useful context for the word. I'm talking about recommendations delivered one on one and as an ongoing conversation over many moons; Not recommendations that I see in my Facebook Feed as a Facebook Post from my Facebook Friends to their Facebook Followers. These mediums are insufficient and grow worse, IMO.
Except when Mr. Gates and the random blogger are both out of their areas of expertise, people still believe Mr. Gates because he was successful elsewhere instead of applying proper skepticism.
Whereas random bloggers are fly-by-night operations in comparison.
If the music was posted to somewhere that it's normal to expect non-serious content (like Reddit or social media) but still properly credited as Ai generated on a non-profit basis (standard practice of course), then that would have been far less offensive.