As for the article mentioning "talent, effort and creativity",
it's about that creating music of value is something for humans with an understanding of other people, and not AI.

I'm not really sure where you ended up, but I started with "Machines may appear to have human intelligence but do not, and are not conscious or creative.".
Being creative requires an understanding of the world, and AI lacks that, so perhaps we agree.

I understand that, but you are missing the point of the article for which I supplied an URL.
Here is a quote:

"A future where human effort is downplayed as gatekeeping; ease and convenience are more valued than talent, effort, and creativity; and placating your own tastes and preferences is more important than being curious about the world around you. A world that’s teeming with beauty and connection that’s just waiting to be experienced, but only if you’re willing to step outside your own limited perspective and allow yourself to be affected by other human beings."

AI music is basically an automated repetition of existing work.
But what is the purpose of music? This might be worth a read:
https://opus.ing/posts/cc-gong...

AI-generated music is decimating the music industry.
Companies will be happy to use AI to produce music based on existing music, rather than paying royalties for new content.
Machines may appear to have human intelligence but do not, and are not conscious or creative.

When it comes to the percentage of music that is AI-generated, Spotify does not publish data,
but Deezer does, stating that 28% of daily uploads are AI-generated.

There have also been articles stating that AI music is primarily listened to by computers, not humans, for royalties.

Check this "Smart Glasses and GDPR: Why Europe Is Cracking Down on Camera-Equipped Eyewear" https://gdprlocal.com/smart-gl...

How about this one?
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

And an EU-wide ban has been debated.

From what I understand Anthropic has to destroy originals and duplicates, and authors can take future legal action over future AI output.

The number of hours of sunlight varies a lot with latitude.
Today, northern Norway (and northern Alaska) has 24 hours of sunlight, the Netherlands 16:23 and New York 14:51.
And for the upcoming New Year's Eve, northern Norway has 0 hours of sunlight, the Netherlands 7:45 and New York 9:16 hours of sunlight.

In studies on mammals, effects on the liver, immune system and reproduction are common.
They are long-lived and therefore remain in the environment for a long time and are therefore spread far, via air and water.
This makes them a global problem, including Antarctica.

There are also seasonal variations for solar energy.

reasonable question

This is a dispute between PriceRunner and Google, and PriceRunner is Swedish.
The EU Commission has already ruled that damage has occurred in the Nordic countries and the UK.
PriceRunner was acquired by Klarna, which is also Swedish but active in 17 countries.

You might also want to check a list of the 2026 UN expectancy values.
https://www.worldometers.info/...

Monaco comes out on top with 86.73
And of the larger countries with high rank Japan is in fourth place with 85.15

Yes, but it is a myth that AI can replace jobs, that AI companies make to the market and investors. AI can help people do their job but not replace them.
Reality is messy and complex and LLMs can't even play chess well.

We have companies betting huge amounts of money on these AI machines being smart in ways that they are not, and will not be in the near future.
The bubble will burst.