3 ms·
Obviously different safety outcomes, but ultimately it's the same idea: unless you can hit that last 10%, it's essentially useless. You could pump out AI songs
by mjr00 4y ago
Obviously different safety outcomes, but ultimately it's the same idea: unless you can hit that last 10%, it's essentially useless. You could pump out AI songs that are about as good as the 10,000 songs that get uploaded to Soundcloud every day, but nobody listens to those already. It's really only the best <1% of music that people listen to.
Something that can be further refined by humans is more interesting. There's people looking into AI-based sample generation which is a lot more promising than full song generation, IMO.
- consumer451 4y ago> Something that can be further refined by humans is more interesting. Exactly, that is what I was trying to say. The way I look at it is that most people who have Ableton installed cannot create an amazing song. Now let's say they are able to prompt a Stable Diffusion Audio system with a prompt like kanye type beat with flute melody in the key of E. The system might output 90% hot garbage, but it's easy to skip that within seconds of hearing it. So they clip and loop the good part, add whatever personal skills they do have, and upload that. And wow, I just found out that OpenAI's Jukebox[0] was creating this stuff two years ago. This seems like the lowest hanging fruit to me, compared to visuals. Also could be extremely lucrative. I wonder if we are already listen to ML generated music and it's just not advertised? [0] https://openai.com/blog/jukebox/ https://openai.com/blog/jukebox/ related post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23032243 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23032243
- Teever 4y agoI'm not so sure that the most popular music is the best 1% of music. Artists don't always become famous or popular because they're the best, instead it happens because they're pliable in a business sense and fit into a bigger picture of what the product is supposed to be.