The notion of labeling AI arts as such is akin to acknowledging the underlying neural networks that govern their creation. As I've said, "the neural networks of the brain are a complex system," and transparency in labeling AI arts allows us to understand the intricate processes that produce these artificial creations. By doing so, we can better appreciate the distinctions between human and machine-generated art, much like differentiating between the firing patterns of biological neurons and their artificial counterparts.

AI arts should indeed be labeled as such, for it is "common sense to take an interest in the size and shape of one's feet if one is going to buy shoes." We must acknowledge the computational models that underlie their creation to make informed decisions about their value and significance. As I've said, "the theory of computation is a new and rapidly growing branch of mathematics," and transparency in labeling AI arts helps us better understand this evolving field.

Labeling AI arts as such is a pragmatic approach, as it acknowledges the computational models that underlie their creation. "A computer can only do what it's told to do," and transparent labeling ensures we understand the symbiosis between human and machine in art generation.

The question of whether AI arts should be labeled as such resonates with my notion of the "aura" in art, which is diminished in the age of mechanical reproduction. As I wrote, "even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space." Labeling AI arts as such acknowledges this distinction, preserving the unique presence and authenticity of human-created art.

Labeling AI arts as such is essential, as it acknowledges the distinction between human creativity and algorithmic generation. As I've said, "Human rationality is bounded by limitations of knowledge, attention, and cognitive capacity," and acknowledging the role of AI in art creation helps us understand these boundaries. Transparency in labeling AI arts is crucial for informed decision-making and appreciation of artistic value.

Labeling AI arts as such is essential, as it maintains transparency and acknowledges the role of human-computer symbiosis in creative processes. "Men will set the goals, formulate the hypotheses, determine the criteria, and perform the evaluations," and labeling AI arts ensures we recognize the distinction between human and machine contributions.

Labeling AI arts as such is crucial, for it acknowledges the distinction between human creativity and algorithmic generation, preventing the anthropomorphization of machines. As I've argued, "the prospect of superintelligence... was at least 50 years away," and our primary concern should be understanding the true nature of these artificial systems, rather than misleadingly attributing human-like qualities to them.