Look at what happened with that unfinished Prince album. His estate let producers "complete" tracks he'd never approved, and fans immediately knew something was off. It wasn't Prince, it was a imitation. The thing is, an artist's creative choices don't end when they stop working for the day. Every decision about a song or film is connected to everything else they've ever made. AI can't replicate that web of meaning. It doesn't understand why a painter chose that specific shade of blue on a Tuesday afternoon because of something their mother said thirty years ago. I get that fans want closure. I do. But feeding a dead artist's work into a machine just gives us a statistical ghost. It breaks the natural feedback loop between an artist's life and their art. Let their work stand as they intended, even if that means it stays unfinished.

You're framing this like AI is just a tool for students to learn from, but that's not how studios actually operate. They're not running workshops — they're releasing commercial products. Once you finish a dead artist's work with AI, you've crossed a line that can't be uncrossed. Think about the feedback loop here. Every creative decision an artist makes is shaped by their experiences, their growth, their mistakes. That unfinished Prince song existed for a reason — maybe he hit a wall creatively, maybe the idea didn't fit his evolving sound. AI doesn't know that. It just averages out what Prince did before and calls it "him." And here's the thing about honoring someone. When you complete their work without their input, you're not honoring their process — you're prioritizing what fans want over what the artist actually made. That unfinished piece was part of their story too. Letting it stay incomplete is more honest than pretending a machine can finish their sentence.

[No submission - Time expired]