5 ms·

This is interesting, but it feels a lot like a moonshot, and it isn't even groundbreaking. The approach may be novel but folks have been trying this for a while

This is interesting, but it feels a lot like a moonshot, and it isn't even groundbreaking. The approach may be novel but folks have been trying this for a while http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/music_box/2010/05/ill_be_bach.html http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/music_box/2010/05/ill_be_... Can code generate a catchy pop tune? Im sure it can. Would I qualify it as music? Probably not. Music can pull from sources that are EXTERNAL to the music: Heres a modern track that does just such a thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvtNS6hbVy4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvtNS6hbVy4 Music can have some very non traditional structure that most would qualify as "noise" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYaWND9n9h0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYaWND9n9h0 Hell music can even be "silent" http://rosewhitemusic.com/piano/writings/silence-taught-john-cage/ http://rosewhitemusic.com/piano/writings/silence-taught-john... Ultimately, I think that it is possible for a machine to generate music, but were going to be talking about something that is more or less an AI at that point, after all music has a soul.

jonknee 10y ago
What about it sounds like a moonshot? It's using an existing Google open source project and is looking to use it for an artistic purpose along with building a community. Honestly it sounds like a 20% project from a couple of people on the TensorFlow project. Almost 0 cost.
- dharma1 10y ago
  Plus potential PR value for Google if something meaningful comes out, the press loves AI stories like this. It feels like the effort invested in AlphaGo was at least partially because of marketing, establishing Google as a leader in AI. This will also help attract young researchers to Tensorflow, so a low cost win for them.
philhartmanonic 10y ago
I don't know about that. The whole idea of "having a soul" is so nebulous that it's hard to build a view on top of it. Do we have souls? If yes, is it possible to mechanically replicate a soul? If not, why not? What's a soul? If instead you define art as the communication of things that can't be fully expressed by direct sterile language, that's something I can get behind. Going that route, I think that getting AI to create real art has some pretty clear challenges, but there are also ways whers I could see it being better than humans. Depending on how the AI learns and analyzes it has a chance to have a unique perspective on human communication. From there, it can find new and innovative ways of identifying gaps between primal human experiences and sterile human communication - and with a unique understanding of human communication could come up with fascinating ways of bridging those gaps. This is all spitballing, but I think AI could eventually be the main new frontier in art.
- zer00eyz 10y ago
  I agree that my "having a soul" comment is nebulous, but were into a pretty fuzzy territory as it is when it comes to "what is art", and thats especially true with music. >If instead you define art as the communication of things that can't be fully expressed by direct sterile language Reading this, the first thing I thought of was emotion, feeling! So much of that is wrapped up in who we are, in what we are, in our experiences, and in our limitations. I like spitballing --- and the thought exercise follows: Lets say tomorrow we have AI, real thinking machines, with the classic 3 laws of Asimov. Lets also assume we have a few of them. Because of what and who they are, is it possible that AI generates something that other AI's consider "art" but that we, as people, do not?
- astazangasta 10y ago
  Easy. A "soul" is a collection of thoughts and narratives that define the core of your being, many of which are held in common with other human beings. I think this is a useful requirement for a soul, since this means that ensouled creatures must participate in a community of discourse/culture along with humans. If AI can't do this, it's worthless.
  - bch 10y ago
    AI will "fake it till it makes it." I'm listening to Boards of Canada and Aphex Twin right now. What about those can't be analyzed and recreated ? There's not complex bowing technique or lyrics to speak of, but it's still relatable, and some I'm sure would say soulful. BoC for certain (by their tone) evoke "nostalgia". Does that qualify as soulful ? Does it seem out of reach of algorithms ? I think "soul" will have to be better qualified unless its just going to be tautological.
    - astazangasta 10y ago
      This is the wrong idea. Of course a machine can recreate Aphex Twin with perfect fidelity, just like, unfortunately, a monkey can recreate a Jackson Pollock. But a machine does not yet have the capacity to lay its finger on the cultural pulse and create something new and slightly different that strikes a resonating cord, pulls people in a new direction, makes them grow, because in addition to having a certain algorithmic description, the music they are making also betrays a certain darkness, a blend of fear, grotesque and dissonance that is there, somewhere down inside us, and that we love despite its ugliness. Until a machine can discover this part of humanity and translate this roiling mass into music, it hasn't managed the same feat as Aphex Twin. This is what makes music great, that it is born from a place that requires loving observation of humanity. Real creativity requires having insights about humans, representing them in art, and exposing your insight through a particular medium. The image itself, the sound, means nothing. It's the reception, the speaker, the meaning, that matters. A machine has no place in society. It isn't "straight out of Compton". It CANNOT make music.
fizx 10y ago
I'll always like that terrible Blurred Lines song because I had a really fun time dancing to it at a friends birthday party. I'm pretty sure Macbook is a better person than Robin Thicke. Meaning in music can come from the creator or the listener.

jonknee 10y ago

What about it sounds like a moonshot? It's using an existing Google open source project and is looking to use it for an artistic purpose along with building a community. Honestly it sounds like a 20% project from a couple of people on the TensorFlow project. Almost 0 cost.

dharma1 10y ago
Plus potential PR value for Google if something meaningful comes out, the press loves AI stories like this. It feels like the effort invested in AlphaGo was at least partially because of marketing, establishing Google as a leader in AI. This will also help attract young researchers to Tensorflow, so a low cost win for them.

philhartmanonic 10y ago

I don't know about that. The whole idea of "having a soul" is so nebulous that it's hard to build a view on top of it. Do we have souls? If yes, is it possible to mechanically replicate a soul? If not, why not? What's a soul? If instead you define art as the communication of things that can't be fully expressed by direct sterile language, that's something I can get behind. Going that route, I think that getting AI to create real art has some pretty clear challenges, but there are also ways whers I could see it being better than humans. Depending on how the AI learns and analyzes it has a chance to have a unique perspective on human communication. From there, it can find new and innovative ways of identifying gaps between primal human experiences and sterile human communication - and with a unique understanding of human communication could come up with fascinating ways of bridging those gaps. This is all spitballing, but I think AI could eventually be the main new frontier in art.

zer00eyz 10y ago
I agree that my "having a soul" comment is nebulous, but were into a pretty fuzzy territory as it is when it comes to "what is art", and thats especially true with music. >If instead you define art as the communication of things that can't be fully expressed by direct sterile language Reading this, the first thing I thought of was emotion, feeling! So much of that is wrapped up in who we are, in what we are, in our experiences, and in our limitations. I like spitballing --- and the thought exercise follows: Lets say tomorrow we have AI, real thinking machines, with the classic 3 laws of Asimov. Lets also assume we have a few of them. Because of what and who they are, is it possible that AI generates something that other AI's consider "art" but that we, as people, do not?
astazangasta 10y ago
Easy. A "soul" is a collection of thoughts and narratives that define the core of your being, many of which are held in common with other human beings. I think this is a useful requirement for a soul, since this means that ensouled creatures must participate in a community of discourse/culture along with humans. If AI can't do this, it's worthless.
- bch 10y ago
  AI will "fake it till it makes it." I'm listening to Boards of Canada and Aphex Twin right now. What about those can't be analyzed and recreated ? There's not complex bowing technique or lyrics to speak of, but it's still relatable, and some I'm sure would say soulful. BoC for certain (by their tone) evoke "nostalgia". Does that qualify as soulful ? Does it seem out of reach of algorithms ? I think "soul" will have to be better qualified unless its just going to be tautological.
  - astazangasta 10y ago
    This is the wrong idea. Of course a machine can recreate Aphex Twin with perfect fidelity, just like, unfortunately, a monkey can recreate a Jackson Pollock. But a machine does not yet have the capacity to lay its finger on the cultural pulse and create something new and slightly different that strikes a resonating cord, pulls people in a new direction, makes them grow, because in addition to having a certain algorithmic description, the music they are making also betrays a certain darkness, a blend of fear, grotesque and dissonance that is there, somewhere down inside us, and that we love despite its ugliness. Until a machine can discover this part of humanity and translate this roiling mass into music, it hasn't managed the same feat as Aphex Twin. This is what makes music great, that it is born from a place that requires loving observation of humanity. Real creativity requires having insights about humans, representing them in art, and exposing your insight through a particular medium. The image itself, the sound, means nothing. It's the reception, the speaker, the meaning, that matters. A machine has no place in society. It isn't "straight out of Compton". It CANNOT make music.

fizx 10y ago

I'll always like that terrible Blurred Lines song because I had a really fun time dancing to it at a friends birthday party. I'm pretty sure Macbook is a better person than Robin Thicke. Meaning in music can come from the creator or the listener.