> And as long as those humans are there you can't really say it's 100% AI, can you? I don't know how real artists do things, but I suspect that at least some o

> And as long as those humans are there you can't really say it's 100% AI, can you? I don't know how real artists do things, but I suspect that at least some of them rely on other people opinions about their new piece of work before going public with it. Basically for the same reasons. It is hard to objectively judge your own creative work. Especially because your fans do not judge your works objectively. You need to listen some voice of sanity to not loose your connection with reality. If it doesn't work as an argument, I can propose a thought experiment. Let's imagine a human artist with a mental disability who sometimes allow himself to do some really strange things. To protect him from big mistakes there is a small group of mentally healthy and competent people to filter his works. The question is: can we say that our disabled artist's works are not his works? Or not 100% his works? > And as long as those humans are there you can't really say it's 100% AI, can you? I believe it depends. How much of filtering those humans do?