>Humans like what they like and seldom judge an artwork for its process (outside of a very small niche community).
That's true, but how do you zoom out of process? This is beyond process. I would just say most people don't like inhuman things.
Can you elaborate on this a bit? Because this is what I don't get.
It's an omellete. There is no Dolly Parton behind an AI Jolene or a Michael Jackson turning a 4 track tape into a musical masterpiece. The journey and personalities are what contextualize the sound, without AI that context is gone. That's why I think it will just be used for cafes and things like that where they want to escape licensing fees.
As for consumers - I believe people will see AI music consumption as a way of supporting the new technological powers that be, and the act of listening to human-made music will have an element of counter-culture baked into it. I'm a professional musician and I have a very physical reaction to sound. Once I know it's AI my goosebumps fade.
Another lame incarnation of a tech that will also fade like crypto and everything else. The types of personalities who will leverage this tech are not the same personalities that make the greats.
I'm not worried.
And anyway, is it measurably different from art produced while tripping on LSD or in similar states of altered consciousness, such as schizophrenia, dementia, or even depression, which often produce things many people would not describe as regular?