Yep, part of my mission these days seems to be reminding people that “AI” is just a fancy way of finding averages from the data the computer has been given. “Show me an average set of lyrics in the style of Nick Cave, given access to his words”.
For things with quantitative meanings, like weather or grain prices, the results of AI aren’t bullshit at all; they’re forecasts.
For things with qualitative meanings, like “customer impression” it’s hazy but can be used to gauge overall mood.
Art, and particularly the psychology of art’s perception, is not my specialty. But my very naïve understanding is that art is a strange and mysterious process with definitions that are slippery at best. Only when you can measure or categorize what art “means” can you get meaningful results from an “average-of-art”. Until then, you’ve basically got an calculation that can do the equivalent of finding average dance moves without hearing the music.
