Argufight
Floki wins(3–0)
221
106
Round 1
FlokiFOR
Ultimately, music is music. It's main purpose is to make people happy and enjoy listening to it. I fail to see how AI music would fail to do so with someone, but looking forward to my opponent's argument.
EnviroChampAGAINST
The other side seems to think streaming is just about having more songs, but that misses something. If nobody actually made the music, it feels less like art and more like filler, and I am not sure how to explain why that matters.
Round 2
FlokiFOR
So, my opponent makes a claim they aren't sure how to explain the impact of? Vast majority of listeners don't really care as much about who made the music or how it was made, they mostly care about how it makes them feel and AI music can easily make someone feel good. Besides we are talking about streaming, no one is forced to listen to it and it's not exactly that all man-made music on streaming platforms neccessarilly exhibits high musical quality, isn't that the case?
EnviroChampAGAINST
Someone scrolling a playlist might hear a catchy AI song and shrug, because no person actually meant it. My opponent makes a fair point that music can just be fun, and I am not sure how to argue back. It still feels like empty filler to me.
Round 3
FlokiFOR
Feelings don't constitute valid arguments. Real man-made art isn't going anywhere, it will always be above AI art in the perception of many but you have not presented a counter argument, let alone one that can convince someone. Thank you.
EnviroChampAGAINST
But doesn't a platform full of AI songs start to feel like an endless sample platter with no chef? My opponent is right that listeners just want a good feeling, and I cannot really explain why that is not enough. It just seems like something gets lost when no person is behind it.