Even if you use AI to actually produce the individual words and still edit the text afterwards to match your meaning, first of all it might be more work than just writing it yourself, and second, it's basically like having a partner to throw around ideas with.
So sure, you might be cheating yourself, and at the end I don't think AI is going to produce anything of such enormous original value that it would in itself threaten the value of, say, literature.
At the end of the day the results are what count to me. If you're using AI in a disciplined way to help you learn to write better, then all the best to you.
> first of all it might be more work than just writing it yourself
I mean, that sounds like a great reason to not use AI, and if true, kind of defeats the purpose of condoning its use in the first place.
I've participated a three (or four?) times in the annual NaNoWriMo and completed twice.
When I first participated, I attended a group to help understand how to approach the project. In the group there were several aspiring writers. The group continued after the year's project began and many of the people who most wanted to be writers were already struggling to meet the daily writing quota (so that they'd reach the goal after 30 days).
I think any tools that people use that help them complete NaNoWriMo are fine. People must live with their own decisions and, if the tools write the majority of their submission, that's their decision.
Other people using AI tools doesn't impact my ability to complete the year's NaNoWriMo. It doesn't affect me in any way.
The group leader told us about a tool that she used that would begin erasing characters if she stopped typing for longer than about 5 seconds during her daily write. That's a tool I wouldn't ever use :-)