5 ms·

To quote from 1984: > The tune had been haunting London for weeks past. It was one of countless similar songs published for the benefit of the proles by a sub-

To quote from 1984: > The tune had been haunting London for weeks past. It was one of countless similar songs published for the benefit of the proles by a sub-section of the Music Department. The words of these songs were composed without any human intervention whatever on an instrument known as a versificator. But the woman sang so tunefully as to turn the dreadful rubbish into an almost pleasant sound. He could hear the woman singing and the scrape of her shoes on the flagstones, and the cries of the children in the street, and somewhere in the distance, a faint roar of traffic, and yet the room seemed curiously silent, thanks to the absence of a telescreen. Part of me worries that I am just gatekeeping. However to me, the point of music was that its meant to put across something personal, human and emotional. Even when its a cover. Whether its a protest song, or shouting about taking someone to a gay bar. To automate that away, what does that do to us culturally? So much of our identity comes from shared art. Emos liked emo music (you know with the shouty backing singer), goths went for death metal or the cure. Indie twats waxed lyrical about how heroine was great for the libertines. All of that shared (mostly bullshit) memory is going to disappear, so what will bring us together, unite groups of kids with a shared like of x? Will it matter? I worry that all the things I enjoy doing are being automated away. Perhaps this is what the weavers felt like when they were replaced with powered looms. Or cabinet makers felt when they saw steam powered power tools that sparked the arts and crafts movement[1] I also frankly worry about how my kids are going to make money. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arts_and_Crafts_movement#Critique_of_industry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arts_and_Crafts_movement#Criti...

phatskat 3y ago
> I also frankly worry about how my kids are going to make money. Then seriously start thinking about which politicians are going to support a future where fewer and fewer jobs are being done by humans. UBI, healthcare for everyone, access to housing etc are all things that can and should be done already. The more that work is automated away, the more crucial these become. We should be striving for a “Jetsons future” where complaining about a long work day means being in the office for two hours.
- ethbr1 3y ago
  I wish to subscribe to your Post-Scarcity Party newsletter. It also makes me wonder about agriculture. It's difficult to envision a post-scarcity future where food production is still manual-intensive. Mandatory picking service, as a civic obligation? And there are a lot of food types that require manual picking. UBI would therefore effectively end production of those types of food. (E.g. more grain, less fruit) Also, the inter-national implications of some UBI countries while others aren't...
  - suoduandao3 3y ago
    UBI would likely only be enough for the barest of necessities of survival. Gardening in an empty lot would be an obvious way to supplement that income, with the same benefits of a gym membership. The point of UBI is that via automation and reduction in cheap energy, opportunities for useful economic activity will be harder to find. In the best case, most people would have a mixture of reliable but marginal income (gardening) and high-potential but risky activity (inventing) with UBI allowing enough security to make crime a bad proposition.
    - phatskat 3y ago
      > In the best case… Why is that the best case? In my “best case”, all of everyone’s needs are met, people pick and grow more intense crops because they want to, artists just enjoy making art, and “income” from work just isn’t really a thing anymore. My best case is everyone has what they need and can access what they want.
      - RugnirViking 3y ago
        It would require a lot of strong social structres. Because a lot of important tasks (like maintaining the floor cleaning equipment in the robot-tractor tyre factory) just really isnt that interesting but still needs to be done. I can see ways motivation can come from others. I'd argue my motivation to persist in my work isn't (directly) because of the money I am paid but rather due to social effects of my colleagues, and the money only contributed to building up this colleague social structure in the first place (alongside the potential value our work brings being an almost equally powerful motivator) keeping these things going when people lose interest will be a challenge.
hurryer 3y ago
Most of today's popular music is heavily computer based. Previous musicians said the same things, electric guitars are not musical instruments, synthesizers have no soul, music made on computer DAWs is artificial and of no value, .... The kids will embrace 100% AI generated music, the parents will be "they don't make music like they used to", forgetting that their parents said the same things about their music.
- hulitu 3y ago
  > The kids will embrace 100% AI generated music, Of course, because, just like in advertising, they are the main target. One really has to love those companies protecting children. Marquis de Sade would have been proud of those companies.
  - hurryer 3y ago
    Nirvana, pink floyd, metallica were also listened mainly by kids. Same with Beatles, and Elvis before that. It's always the kids who listen to what later will be called "great music".
    - ethbr1 3y ago
      Counterpoint: kids have generally trended towards music that expresses strong youth-centric viewpoints (rock, punk, rap, etc). Even with AI generation, I expect the most popular music will still have a human viewpoint behind it.
      - TeMPOraL 3y ago
        Problem is, AI will understand/emulate human viewpoint better than any human could. It's just a matter of continuing to optimize.
        ethbr1 3y ago
        We'll see. I expect youth vernacular (and its mutation rate) will prove an extremely challenging domain for AI. But maybe someone will crack it! God knows it's worth enough money.
moss2 3y ago
[flagged]
- voidhorse 3y ago
  I agree with your aesthetic principles. I think the difficulties and reservations, for me at least, arise when you consider the economic framework and the possible shifts that will happen. I can't see adoption of these tools doing anything other than giving these giant conglomerates yet more capital, yet more power.
- cmur 3y ago
  Looking beyond your sophomoric tone, I understand where you’re at, but I think these arguments on both sides are silly. OP makes a valid point in regard to the sentimentality behind creating art. You’re right in that no art “should” be a a particular thing or shape, but I am with OP that asking the question “what will happen to us culturally” is necessary every time a new tool arrives. The maximalist “all things are tools for artists” works in theory, but tools have changed cultures drastically, and that is very easy to point out throughout history. I also find it comical that you thrust your opinion on what art is upon OP and say they are a “conformist hypocrite.” Both of you just hold an opinion on art and culture that differ, nothing more. To use your words, it’s personal and you have no say in how they should interact with or interpret art. When it comes to art, neither of your opinions, or Google’s, matters.
allturtles 3y ago
> Part of me worries that I am just gatekeeping. The abhorrence of "gatekeeping" may be my least favorite cultural trends of the last decade. Gatekeeping is often desirable. Expertise is a good thing. Specialization is a good thing. Communities based around shared interests and values are a good thing.
- KaiserPro 3y ago
  I think you're missing my point. I'm acutely aware that I might be wrong, and gatekeepers tend to be the type of people that belittle other people because they feel threatened by newcomers trying to join in. > Expertise is a good thing. Specialization is a good thing yes! that's a standard of quality. To be a good x you need to pass this quality bar. I don't think that's really gatekeeping. Gatekeeping, well the way I see it, is someone dismissing someone else based on parameters unrelated to the matter at hand. "you can't understand x if you didn't do y" Hence why me dismissing AI generated backing tracks not being "real music" because its not made by "real musicians" could be read as gatekeeping. > Communities based around shared interests and values are a good thing. Also yes! But thats not a reason to be hostile to newcomers.
rakkhi 3y ago
Yes arts will be impacted by AI. Added to my article on economics of LLM's: https://open.substack.com/pub/rakkhi/p/economics-of-large-language-models?r=1afqp&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web https://open.substack.com/pub/rakkhi/p/economics-of-large-la...

phatskat 3y ago

> I also frankly worry about how my kids are going to make money. Then seriously start thinking about which politicians are going to support a future where fewer and fewer jobs are being done by humans. UBI, healthcare for everyone, access to housing etc are all things that can and should be done already. The more that work is automated away, the more crucial these become. We should be striving for a “Jetsons future” where complaining about a long work day means being in the office for two hours.

ethbr1 3y ago
I wish to subscribe to your Post-Scarcity Party newsletter. It also makes me wonder about agriculture. It's difficult to envision a post-scarcity future where food production is still manual-intensive. Mandatory picking service, as a civic obligation? And there are a lot of food types that require manual picking. UBI would therefore effectively end production of those types of food. (E.g. more grain, less fruit) Also, the inter-national implications of some UBI countries while others aren't...
- suoduandao3 3y ago
  UBI would likely only be enough for the barest of necessities of survival. Gardening in an empty lot would be an obvious way to supplement that income, with the same benefits of a gym membership. The point of UBI is that via automation and reduction in cheap energy, opportunities for useful economic activity will be harder to find. In the best case, most people would have a mixture of reliable but marginal income (gardening) and high-potential but risky activity (inventing) with UBI allowing enough security to make crime a bad proposition.
  - phatskat 3y ago
    > In the best case… Why is that the best case? In my “best case”, all of everyone’s needs are met, people pick and grow more intense crops because they want to, artists just enjoy making art, and “income” from work just isn’t really a thing anymore. My best case is everyone has what they need and can access what they want.
    - RugnirViking 3y ago
      It would require a lot of strong social structres. Because a lot of important tasks (like maintaining the floor cleaning equipment in the robot-tractor tyre factory) just really isnt that interesting but still needs to be done. I can see ways motivation can come from others. I'd argue my motivation to persist in my work isn't (directly) because of the money I am paid but rather due to social effects of my colleagues, and the money only contributed to building up this colleague social structure in the first place (alongside the potential value our work brings being an almost equally powerful motivator) keeping these things going when people lose interest will be a challenge.

hurryer 3y ago

Most of today's popular music is heavily computer based. Previous musicians said the same things, electric guitars are not musical instruments, synthesizers have no soul, music made on computer DAWs is artificial and of no value, .... The kids will embrace 100% AI generated music, the parents will be "they don't make music like they used to", forgetting that their parents said the same things about their music.

hulitu 3y ago
> The kids will embrace 100% AI generated music, Of course, because, just like in advertising, they are the main target. One really has to love those companies protecting children. Marquis de Sade would have been proud of those companies.
- hurryer 3y ago
  Nirvana, pink floyd, metallica were also listened mainly by kids. Same with Beatles, and Elvis before that. It's always the kids who listen to what later will be called "great music".
  - ethbr1 3y ago
    Counterpoint: kids have generally trended towards music that expresses strong youth-centric viewpoints (rock, punk, rap, etc). Even with AI generation, I expect the most popular music will still have a human viewpoint behind it.
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      Problem is, AI will understand/emulate human viewpoint better than any human could. It's just a matter of continuing to optimize.
      - ethbr1 3y ago
        We'll see. I expect youth vernacular (and its mutation rate) will prove an extremely challenging domain for AI. But maybe someone will crack it! God knows it's worth enough money.

moss2 3y ago

[flagged]

voidhorse 3y ago
I agree with your aesthetic principles. I think the difficulties and reservations, for me at least, arise when you consider the economic framework and the possible shifts that will happen. I can't see adoption of these tools doing anything other than giving these giant conglomerates yet more capital, yet more power.
cmur 3y ago
Looking beyond your sophomoric tone, I understand where you’re at, but I think these arguments on both sides are silly. OP makes a valid point in regard to the sentimentality behind creating art. You’re right in that no art “should” be a a particular thing or shape, but I am with OP that asking the question “what will happen to us culturally” is necessary every time a new tool arrives. The maximalist “all things are tools for artists” works in theory, but tools have changed cultures drastically, and that is very easy to point out throughout history. I also find it comical that you thrust your opinion on what art is upon OP and say they are a “conformist hypocrite.” Both of you just hold an opinion on art and culture that differ, nothing more. To use your words, it’s personal and you have no say in how they should interact with or interpret art. When it comes to art, neither of your opinions, or Google’s, matters.

allturtles 3y ago

> Part of me worries that I am just gatekeeping. The abhorrence of "gatekeeping" may be my least favorite cultural trends of the last decade. Gatekeeping is often desirable. Expertise is a good thing. Specialization is a good thing. Communities based around shared interests and values are a good thing.

KaiserPro 3y ago
I think you're missing my point. I'm acutely aware that I might be wrong, and gatekeepers tend to be the type of people that belittle other people because they feel threatened by newcomers trying to join in. > Expertise is a good thing. Specialization is a good thing yes! that's a standard of quality. To be a good x you need to pass this quality bar. I don't think that's really gatekeeping. Gatekeeping, well the way I see it, is someone dismissing someone else based on parameters unrelated to the matter at hand. "you can't understand x if you didn't do y" Hence why me dismissing AI generated backing tracks not being "real music" because its not made by "real musicians" could be read as gatekeeping. > Communities based around shared interests and values are a good thing. Also yes! But thats not a reason to be hostile to newcomers.

rakkhi 3y ago

Yes arts will be impacted by AI. Added to my article on economics of LLM's: https://open.substack.com/pub/rakkhi/p/economics-of-large-language-models?r=1afqp&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web https://open.substack.com/pub/rakkhi/p/economics-of-large-la...