[Permit]

> In my view, attempts like this misunderstand much of the point of music. That is, to communicate aspects of human life that are deeply interwoven with facts and experiences outside of the music itself.

I actually think you've missed the point. These attempts do not aspire to communicate aspects of human life at all. They're simply scientific and engineering endeavors that seek to answer less profound questions like: "Can computers generate music?" (Yes) and "Can computers generate music that is enjoyable to listen to?" (Not yet)

To go one step further: There are glaring and obvious technical faults in many of the generated samples (this isn't a criticism, they're better than past work!). I suspect that if you are feeling unsettled by these songs it's because of those flaws and not because they are "semantically empty".

[mellow2020]

> These attempts do not aspire to communicate aspects of human life at all.

Of course not. They, just like enough humans do already, imitate the results of "having an adventure of the soul".

> "Can computers generate music?" (Yes) and "Can computers generate music that is enjoyable to listen to?" (Not yet)

And we're talking about the question "should they?", which science can't even attempt to answer. "Play from your heart", and all that; not even best-selling artists pumping out mediocrity are above that criticism, even when they do it according to the best of their ability and conscience, and even when it makes people "happy".