Unfortunately, I'm 18 points away from being able to downvote, so I'm posting this instead.
My recommendation: chill out and take a 30 second break before re-reading and then posting your comment. Also remember that a human being just like you spend a non-trivial amount of effort working on whatever it is you are looking at it. Then you might feel less inclined to naively shit all over it. One alternative approach, if you have nothing constructive to say: peacefully close the tab and move on with your day.
You even threaten to downvote me! (oh my). How can you simultaneously want to change the world and clamor for censorship?
The cultural attitude you see prevalent here defending creators is due to the community's wont to make this a safe place for sharing, especially given the recent efforts at making "Show HN" a first-class citizen.
Constructive criticism is a good thing, but I don't think that's missing from HN. What dwaltrip (and Hytosys below) are suggesting is that your criticism is not in the least bit constructive, and takes a tone that would otherwise negate any constructive bits. I concur.
If you're curious to see how a comment might actually be constructive in the course of being critical, I'd seriously consider erikschoster's comment.
Also, I wasn't threatening to downvote, I was explaining why I was creating a somewhat low content post.
First, the synthesis of floaty background nonsense constitutes a contribution to a problem, not a solution we've been looking for. This is akin to making an automatic reality show generator. Nothing could be less aspirational. Second, what's upsetting here is how technically uninteresting this particular bot is, and yet we have a comment thread vaguely waving hands and intimating that something marvelous and deeply technical is going on here. The third problem is the pretension. The word "stochastic" here simply means some coins were flipped. It's hard to imagine how you would be posting about a "deterministic" music generator.
I think I need to wash my ears.