Most people aren’t professional musicians though.

I don’t understand why people are so cynical about this, it seems like a harmless demonstration of the current state of the technology.

Essentially yes, I would give the person using AI to generate an original image the credit as the image’s creator. I’m willing to bet that anything “good” AI generates is a result of many attempts and refinements and a human selecting the best result, and to me that makes it a human-driven creative process using a tool, the same as using a random number generator.

I’m deliberately not saying “copyrightable” because I don’t personally believe that digital files should be copyrightable (since recognising a copyright of a number is insanity), but it should be copyrightable in a society that recognises number copyrights.

My thought on that is if you generate multiple images through a random number generator and find one that’s interesting or aesthetically pleasing, then you are the creator since selecting it, while low effort, is the creative process.

It’s a Garden-path sentence

I notice a lot less spam on beehaw so they must be doing something right.

I had thought of provider myself, people seem to be happy with having an email provider and it’s not that different a concept.