4 ms·

A pretty important distinction between machines in the 1980s and ChatGPT is the amount of human effort that the output requires. It's unlikely that Herbie Hanco

by handy2000 3y ago

A pretty important distinction between machines in the 1980s and ChatGPT is the amount of human effort that the output requires. It's unlikely that Herbie Hancock considers people who press "start" on a Casio synthesizer to play a factory programmed demo track real musicians. If someone incorporates a factory preset into a song - sure, nothing's wrong with that. That's when a machine is used as a tool, not as a substitute for human creativity.

insickness 3y ago
> It's unlikely that Herbie Hancock considers people who press "start" on a Casio synthesizer to play a factory programmed demo track real musicians. Someone at the factory wrote and programmed that song, so he probably would consider it art. > If someone incorporates a factory preset into a song - sure, nothing's wrong with that. That's when a machine is used as a tool, not as a substitute for human creativity. It's all just different levels of the devil's company. What if I use an AI chord generator and decide which chords to use in my song based on what the AI generates? What if I have the AI generate 10,000 songs in totality and I choose the best one? What if I don't use AI but compose a song by mathematically computing all the optimal elements of a pop song based on every song that's come before it? What if I hire the world's best violinist and record 4 minutes and 28 seconds of the violinist not playing, could that not be art?
- handy2000 3y ago
  > Someone at the factory wrote and programmed that song, so he probably would consider it art. That's clearly not the argument I was making. > What if I use an AI chord generator and decide which chords to use in my song based on what the AI generates? "Write me a pop song" == not you. "Create a chord progression in the key of E major" plus you yourself write the actual song and lyrics == you.

insickness 3y ago

> It's unlikely that Herbie Hancock considers people who press "start" on a Casio synthesizer to play a factory programmed demo track real musicians. Someone at the factory wrote and programmed that song, so he probably would consider it art. > If someone incorporates a factory preset into a song - sure, nothing's wrong with that. That's when a machine is used as a tool, not as a substitute for human creativity. It's all just different levels of the devil's company. What if I use an AI chord generator and decide which chords to use in my song based on what the AI generates? What if I have the AI generate 10,000 songs in totality and I choose the best one? What if I don't use AI but compose a song by mathematically computing all the optimal elements of a pop song based on every song that's come before it? What if I hire the world's best violinist and record 4 minutes and 28 seconds of the violinist not playing, could that not be art?

handy2000 3y ago
> Someone at the factory wrote and programmed that song, so he probably would consider it art. That's clearly not the argument I was making. > What if I use an AI chord generator and decide which chords to use in my song based on what the AI generates? "Write me a pop song" == not you. "Create a chord progression in the key of E major" plus you yourself write the actual song and lyrics == you.