Wait, isnt that sort of the exact opposite?

I think what parent meant was, all poplar art tries to sarisfy some “algorithm”. (Algorithm of what will masses listen to)

20 years ago that was trying to pick good ratios of bass, haircut, and marketing to get into mtv top ten.

I'm reminded of The Manual:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manual

Maybe if it's intentional. Making a statement by hitting the algo buttons.

And I'm not saying he's not.

But do we call it art if it's fraud?

Isn't a lot of HN readers against AI generated spam and SEO spun content?

I don't call those art, and I'm not sure yet what to call thos composer.

What's the fraud if people like it?

You are entering into the hundreds year old "what is art" debate.

When there is no human in the performance loop at all, that's flirting very close to selling a cheap blend as as 18-year old single malt.

Where does Spotify say "our music is 100% organic human sourced, no algos involved"?

Does art need to “make a statement”?

I think:

- It is subjective.

- if you enjoy it, then it is art.

Doing music for profit is not a new concept, just look at pop music (and especially “boy bands”)

But if end result sounds good to a lot of people, how is that not an art?