>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.