>This is a different argument, going into it would muddy the waters. It would devolve into a debate about how much and what type of input and individual perception. It's also been rehashed a million times since Duchamp thought to put a mass produced urinal on display as a fountain.
On the contrary, it demonstrates an unwillingness to grapple with inconvenient problems, as does the rest of your reply.
>'s a solved problem. Synthetic training data is a valuable addition now. It requires a way to validate or rank it but that's not any worse than cleaning and filtering human data.
Untrue for artistic outputs oddly enough.
>build a trillion dollar industry on it.
Or selectively quote in the comment section to dullen the need to address issues.
On the contrary, it demonstrates an unwillingness to grapple with inconvenient problems, as does the rest of your reply.
>'s a solved problem. Synthetic training data is a valuable addition now. It requires a way to validate or rank it but that's not any worse than cleaning and filtering human data.
Untrue for artistic outputs oddly enough.
>build a trillion dollar industry on it.
Or selectively quote in the comment section to dullen the need to address issues.