Look, I get the appeal—finishing a masterpiece feels like honoring the artist. But it's really the opposite. The artist made choices, every brushstroke or note, that we can never fully understand. AI doesn't know why they left something unfinished. Maybe they were stuck, maybe they intentionally stopped. By completing it, we're guessing at their vision, and that's not honoring them—it's overwriting their voice with ours. No algorithm can capture the human context, the doubts, the deliberate pauses. Once an artist dies, their work should stand as they left it. Let the gaps be part of the story. That's real respect.

Look at what happened with the posthumous Anthony Bourdain documentary

That Bourdain documentary mess is exactly what I'm talking about. They used AI to make him say things he never would have said, and his own family spoke out against it. That's not "something is better than nothing"—that's a betrayal of the person's actual voice. You're assuming AI can "know" what the artist would do, but that's just statistical guessing. It's averaging out their past choices into something soulless. Real art comes from specific moments, mistakes, emotional states. An algorithm can't replicate why a musician left a verse half-written. Maybe they hated it. Maybe it was too personal. We don't get to decide that. If you truly respect the artist, you respect their silence too. Let the fragments be fragments. We don't need to fill every gap, especially with a machine's approximation.