6 ms·

I don't think I can endure much more AI slop seeping its way into my life.

by cedws 3y ago

weregiraffe 3y ago
Art will realign to put more value on live performances. Don't worry, people who push AI art don't understand that art is a form of communication between humans. They might learn when the bubble pops and they are left with a trillion shiny "art" objects that are worth nothing, because nobody wants to look at them.
- Morelesshell 3y ago
  Depending on the popularity and your income, the experience of a artist life is really not that intim as you make it.
  - weregiraffe 3y ago
    The experience of knowing there's a human behind the message is valuable. People hated corporate propaganda "art" before AI was a thing, for the same reason it is not human.
    - erikbye 3y ago
      Depending on the AI tool in question, and the level of control it offers the human, there can definitely be a human behind the message, even if the final output is AI generated, the human had a creative vision and used the available tools to make it happen. It's no different than using Photoshop. Unless you only consider art done with oil and on a canvas to be the "real thing."
    - Morelesshell 3y ago
      I know plenty of people, including me, who has no real knowledge about those humans. And sometimes not knowing is better like the example with Rammstein and row zero were some manager woman was asking other woman if they want to meet their rockstars. Btw. on a good electronic music set, knowing the arist is probably more a quality sign than a personal aspect. Knowing that i like what arist xy does, means i might like to keep an eye on future work because i like the style of it. Nonetheless, i do also think that fandom and doing real tours will still be the unique things for bands. There should always be a market for human content.
- fifticon 3y ago
  I don't quite get why this is downvoted; it may not be the absolute truth, but in my personal anecdotal experience, there is quite some truth to it. I have had a lot of fun playing around with image generation and chat gpt. But have also had the non-surprising "Hedonistic Fatigue" that comes with excess access to something originally valued. I have now been able to generate 4 and 5 digit numbers of pictures of awesome colourful steam locomotives and epic dungeon vistas, but now find myself fatigued by "what on earth am I going to use 5000 dungeon pictures for?", coupled with the dread of being forced to CHOOSE from 5000 options. And I learn the known principle, that when you can choose from 4 options, you are happy you picked the best of 4, but when you can pick from 5000 options, you are left feeling inadequate with "I almost certainly was not able to pick the best of those 5000 options, and trying to do so would exhaust me". So suddenly, picking something from your menu of options, feels dreadful and fatiguing.. (I get the same feeling sometimes, when trying to pick a movie to watch out of 16.000 options). So yeah, no doubt the AI sketch/refinement tool will be merged into our creative process, but for the time being, I feel a second generation of alienation-estrangement with my "available options".
  - Teever 3y ago
    I'm going to assume that like me you're not an artist, or at least not the kind of artist who can generate 5000 dungeon pictures by hand. I've been thinking about it the same as you but something that I think we're missing here is what can the person who can already make 5k pictures by hand do with this kind of tool? It makes me think of the later albums that Frank Zappa produced with a Synclavier. That guy went hog-wild on that thing and banged out some unbelievable albums. What would he have been able to do with AI generated music technology if it was the Synclavier of his time? What are the Frank Zappas of our time going to do with AI? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Zappa#Synclavier_works https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Zappa#Synclavier_works
  - Shorel 3y ago
    Yes, having to check 1840 options is about 1830 too many =)
- mrfinn 3y ago
  Sorry to disagree, we already crossed the line where the "Her" movie could turn into a real story. To say it more clearly: It won't take a long to see people even having affective relationships with AIs.
  - vsnf 3y ago
    They definitely already are, which is basically the business model of girlfriend.myanima.ai, along with a litany of similar services.
  - jajko 3y ago
    Sure, some desperate lonely people have very close relationships with ie pillows. What OP says will most probably be true though - when there is ocean of cheap/free perfect AI art, it will be worthless. What will be worthy is imperfect human-created art. We already went through this decades ago with expensive hand made vs cheap machine made stuff, this is just another iteration. I am not saying it will be great to be an artist, just like in the past few famous live in limelight and most will struggle to stay afloat.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
      - emptyfile 3y ago
        [dead]
  - emptyfile 3y ago
    [dead]
  - raincole 3y ago
    Having pets improves your mood and health. In a measurable way. So people already have "effective" relationships wit their pets. What's the difference between an effective relationship and an affective one?
- svantana 3y ago
  100%. I compare it to the invention of cameras - before that you could make an honest living as a portrait painter, no inspiration needed. Afterwards, painters needed to lean into artistic qualities to stand out. But also, 'Photography' was born - what was seemingly just a press of a button turned out to be an artform.
- Satam 3y ago
  Not totally true. Yes, there's value in live performances and human connection but most of the songs we listen don't stimulate that. Hell, often we don't even know what the musician looks like, who they are, how they sound live, etc. They're just items in our Spotify queue that are only there to give us a dopamine hit with their sequence of well-composed sounds. There's a craving for a deeper connection but that's usually the smaller part of our everyday consumption.
  - piva00 3y ago
    > Not totally true. Yes, there's value in live performances and human connection but most of the songs we listen don't stimulate that. Hell, often we don't even know what the musician looks like, who they are, how they sound live, etc. They're just items in our Spotify queue that are only there to give us a dopamine hit with their sequence of well-composed sounds. If you are a little bit of a critical listener you listen to those songs because you connect to them somehow, that's the power of music, it's a language for emotions that you don't need to know how the artists look like, or their backgrounds, to feel what they try to convey. Having the context/background might help to intellectualise a piece of music but the feeling comes from the art itself. AI music is pure entertainment, not art.
  - helboi4 3y ago
    I mean theres a lot of like crap production music for film and Tv out there. I imagine like cheap reality tv shows will start using AI music. Maybe anime, which is always looking for ways to make its arduous production methods easier and cheaper because the industry is so volatile and not guarunteed to be profitable. But I think to make properly decent money as an artist you need to tour. This has been the model ever since streaming took hold. So yeah, its not going to be that profitable to be a faceless AI pumping out stuff into your spotify stream. I think the market will be in music for TV.
- mixermachine 3y ago
  If you can pay for a live performance and have to time to go there, yes. A lot of people can't and a 5-10$ Spotify/Apple Music/... account is all they can afford (if at all). AI music will disrupt this market. Spotify for example will try to produce their own AI music (like they already do with regular music). The Christmas playlist will then mainly contain their music. That saves a lot of money for the.
- hobofan 3y ago
  "Art" already puts more value on live performances and scarcity. Popular music consumption is largely removed from that. Yeah, the last two live mega tours (Taylor Swift and Beyoncé) have a tad more personality than the average artist, but the usual stuff that you would hear on the radio might as well be AI generated and live-performed by animatronics and a significant chunk of the audience wouldn't care or even notice.
  - Nursie 3y ago
    See also vocaloid 'performers' such as Hatsune Miku or Ia in Japan.
  - dagw 3y ago
    I think the first place we will see large scale AI music replace 'real' music is in the 'lo-fi' background music that just about every bar, restaurant and shop has going in a loop. Instead of having various playlists, the restaurant owner can just choose between some styles, moods and tempos in an app and the AI will autogenerate an endless steam of background music that matches the vibe they are going for.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- maxerickson 3y ago
  They are already worth very little if more than one party can produce them at the push of a button.
  - immibis 3y ago
    They made it illegal to produce exact replicas of Frozen at the push of a button; they could make AI illegal too. Except, the only reason it's illegal to copy Frozen is that it gives rich people less money. Generative AI gives rich people more money, so if anything, it'll be illegal not to use it.
    - maxerickson 3y ago
      It's not an apt analogy, unless you think that the production of generative images will be restricted to a few parties (because that is what copyright does, it restricts the right to copy to the originator). And then if it was restricted to a few parties, they still have to compete with human artists, they can't just charge whatever.
- fennecfoxy 3y ago
  Yes, this is why the most popular songs on the radio atm are all mass produced, generic (for their genre) crap that doesn't really stray beyond the proven money making methods. I mean people watch Love Island on TV for chrisssssakes. Humans can definitely be mindless consumers, where the sugar salt and fat in fast-food is the same as false drama, outrage, sex and violence in media. We all got buttons and they're so easy to push. Just look how popular TT is versus the type of content on there; mostly short-lived mindless stuff.
Nursie 3y ago
AI slop (to me) would be to pass this off as a song or something meritorious to listen to. IMHO this and things like it are basically a sub-class of comedy or satire, so I have time for this sort of thing. It's a joke, and should (can?) only be appreciated as artistic as someone saying "Wouldn't it be funny if ... ?" because now that casual thought can be turned into a pretty instant "well here it is! LOL!". I don't think you're supposed to appreciate it as music. Maybe I'm calling it wrong though. (edit - I will admit that upon further thought, I'm not sure how I feel about this when compared to, for example, Nina Gordon recording "Straight Outta Compton" as an accoustic, mildly lamenting singer-songwriter style number 20-some years ago. It's clearly in the same satrical arena but one took a lot more effort and imagination. Kinda, because there was a lot of effort and imagination that went into both the training data and the model, even if this specific output was only a passing joke. It's quite hard to reason about this stuff...)
- michaelt 3y ago
  In my experience, there's less of a distinction than you might think. A lot of satirical songs are absolute bangers, because (for example) to do a send-up of the tropes of X music, you must know all the tropes of X music, and be able to perform them. So a lot of satirical music is actually done by people with a lot of skill and passion for the thing being satirised. And because satirists don't have to worry about being predictable or unoriginal, they can put in more crowd-pleasing cliches per minute than 'serious' artists, giving them the most intense X of all X artists. (Not saying the MIT license is a banger though - just that some satirical songs are)
- iamben 3y ago
  Personal opinion, but I think you're calling it wrong. Also personal opinion, I absolutely hate the idea of it happening, buuut... I think it's a bit like everyone who said "black cabs in London have nothing to fear; X years of 'The Knowledge' will always be better than a guy with an App in an old Prius..." Except it was all wrong. Black cabs are probably still superior, but the bulk of people (and especially new customers) are all using Uber, because it's easier and they just don't care. It sucks that production factory, literally built to make money, AI created junk music will be a thing, but it most likely will. Someone will exploit that they can make a ton of cash with low risk and budget. They'll have the connections to, despite initial (somewhat) faux outrage from the public/press, get radio play/playlisted online ("probably even 'ironic' addition from the hipster music crowd"). The song will be an earworm, and aside from the musicians that hear all the flaws, the passive every day mom and pop listeners will get the hook stuck in their head and it'll just be another great tune like any other. I don't think we'll replace 'celebrity', I think that'll still happen, and I think maybe greater appreciation will happen to 'real musicians' (with a face!). But 'everyday' disposable pop (like all those one hit wonder tunes that are still played in nightclubs, pubs, throwback radio, wedding discos) - that's going to be disrupted massively.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
insin 3y ago
Suno links have already become what grey screenshots of ChatGPT were just after it came out, listened to a few at first and now I just keep on scrolling.
- disqard 3y ago
  I had a similar thought -- my perspective: There will be a TON of these 60-second tracks, and no one wants to listen for anywhere near that long while skimming a feed, so these will now be ignored.
chilmers 3y ago
To me the feeling of AI generated content is less "slop" and more "in-flight magazine". It can have a surface sheen of quality that you can lure you in, but you realise it's devoid of any vitality or soul.
- Max-q 3y ago
  When recorded music was invented, musicians protested. Recorded music was devoid of any vitality or soul. Recorded music still became a hit. Then we got the synthesizer. Again we got the same complaints, lifeless and without soul. The synthesizer still became a hit. Now the next step is happening, and we see the same complaints all over. Only time will show if the next step will happen anyway. My gut feeling tells me that AI art will gain acceptance over time, and we will just think of it as "art" or "music", just as we did with recorded mysic and synthetic sounds.
  - piva00 3y ago
    You are just skipping the step that all of it had the human element considered, which to all of us is a very intrinsic part of "art". When AI generates a piece of entertainment it's ok to just call it entertainment, it's not art until AI actually has something we can relate to as consciousness (aka a "soul").
    - The_Colonel 3y ago
      Human is still writing the prompt. That's your human element. The prompt can be detailed, creative, and innovative. Kinda like a composer comes up with an idea for a new piece. But now the composer won't need the technical ability to translate it into musical notation.
      - vasco 3y ago
        Not sure if writing the prompt is the human element because an AI can easily write prompts. I think a stronger human element is in the training data (while that training data isn't dominated by AI generated content itself).
hobo_mark 3y ago
If you ever turn the radio on or hear the spotify weekly top playlist, it's not like contemporary cookie cutter pop music is any better. At least with this anyone can quickly experiment quirky new ideas!

I don't think I can endure much more AI slop seeping its way into my life.

by cedws 3y ago

I don't think I can endure much more AI slop seeping its way into my life.

Art will realign to put more value on live performances. Don't worry, people who push AI art don't understand that art is a form of communication between humans. They might learn when the bubble pops and they are left with a trillion shiny "art" objects that are worth nothing, because nobody wants to look at them.

Morelesshell 3y ago
Depending on the popularity and your income, the experience of a artist life is really not that intim as you make it.
- weregiraffe 3y ago
  The experience of knowing there's a human behind the message is valuable. People hated corporate propaganda "art" before AI was a thing, for the same reason it is not human.
  - erikbye 3y ago
    Depending on the AI tool in question, and the level of control it offers the human, there can definitely be a human behind the message, even if the final output is AI generated, the human had a creative vision and used the available tools to make it happen. It's no different than using Photoshop. Unless you only consider art done with oil and on a canvas to be the "real thing."
  - Morelesshell 3y ago
    I know plenty of people, including me, who has no real knowledge about those humans. And sometimes not knowing is better like the example with Rammstein and row zero were some manager woman was asking other woman if they want to meet their rockstars. Btw. on a good electronic music set, knowing the arist is probably more a quality sign than a personal aspect. Knowing that i like what arist xy does, means i might like to keep an eye on future work because i like the style of it. Nonetheless, i do also think that fandom and doing real tours will still be the unique things for bands. There should always be a market for human content.
fifticon 3y ago
I don't quite get why this is downvoted; it may not be the absolute truth, but in my personal anecdotal experience, there is quite some truth to it. I have had a lot of fun playing around with image generation and chat gpt. But have also had the non-surprising "Hedonistic Fatigue" that comes with excess access to something originally valued. I have now been able to generate 4 and 5 digit numbers of pictures of awesome colourful steam locomotives and epic dungeon vistas, but now find myself fatigued by "what on earth am I going to use 5000 dungeon pictures for?", coupled with the dread of being forced to CHOOSE from 5000 options. And I learn the known principle, that when you can choose from 4 options, you are happy you picked the best of 4, but when you can pick from 5000 options, you are left feeling inadequate with "I almost certainly was not able to pick the best of those 5000 options, and trying to do so would exhaust me". So suddenly, picking something from your menu of options, feels dreadful and fatiguing.. (I get the same feeling sometimes, when trying to pick a movie to watch out of 16.000 options). So yeah, no doubt the AI sketch/refinement tool will be merged into our creative process, but for the time being, I feel a second generation of alienation-estrangement with my "available options".
- Teever 3y ago
  I'm going to assume that like me you're not an artist, or at least not the kind of artist who can generate 5000 dungeon pictures by hand. I've been thinking about it the same as you but something that I think we're missing here is what can the person who can already make 5k pictures by hand do with this kind of tool? It makes me think of the later albums that Frank Zappa produced with a Synclavier. That guy went hog-wild on that thing and banged out some unbelievable albums. What would he have been able to do with AI generated music technology if it was the Synclavier of his time? What are the Frank Zappas of our time going to do with AI? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Zappa#Synclavier_works https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Zappa#Synclavier_works
- Shorel 3y ago
  Yes, having to check 1840 options is about 1830 too many =)
mrfinn 3y ago
Sorry to disagree, we already crossed the line where the "Her" movie could turn into a real story. To say it more clearly: It won't take a long to see people even having affective relationships with AIs.
- vsnf 3y ago
  They definitely already are, which is basically the business model of girlfriend.myanima.ai, along with a litany of similar services.
- jajko 3y ago
  Sure, some desperate lonely people have very close relationships with ie pillows. What OP says will most probably be true though - when there is ocean of cheap/free perfect AI art, it will be worthless. What will be worthy is imperfect human-created art. We already went through this decades ago with expensive hand made vs cheap machine made stuff, this is just another iteration. I am not saying it will be great to be an artist, just like in the past few famous live in limelight and most will struggle to stay afloat.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
    - emptyfile 3y ago
      [dead]
- emptyfile 3y ago
  [dead]
- raincole 3y ago
  Having pets improves your mood and health. In a measurable way. So people already have "effective" relationships wit their pets. What's the difference between an effective relationship and an affective one?
svantana 3y ago
100%. I compare it to the invention of cameras - before that you could make an honest living as a portrait painter, no inspiration needed. Afterwards, painters needed to lean into artistic qualities to stand out. But also, 'Photography' was born - what was seemingly just a press of a button turned out to be an artform.
Satam 3y ago
Not totally true. Yes, there's value in live performances and human connection but most of the songs we listen don't stimulate that. Hell, often we don't even know what the musician looks like, who they are, how they sound live, etc. They're just items in our Spotify queue that are only there to give us a dopamine hit with their sequence of well-composed sounds. There's a craving for a deeper connection but that's usually the smaller part of our everyday consumption.
- piva00 3y ago
  > Not totally true. Yes, there's value in live performances and human connection but most of the songs we listen don't stimulate that. Hell, often we don't even know what the musician looks like, who they are, how they sound live, etc. They're just items in our Spotify queue that are only there to give us a dopamine hit with their sequence of well-composed sounds. If you are a little bit of a critical listener you listen to those songs because you connect to them somehow, that's the power of music, it's a language for emotions that you don't need to know how the artists look like, or their backgrounds, to feel what they try to convey. Having the context/background might help to intellectualise a piece of music but the feeling comes from the art itself. AI music is pure entertainment, not art.
- helboi4 3y ago
  I mean theres a lot of like crap production music for film and Tv out there. I imagine like cheap reality tv shows will start using AI music. Maybe anime, which is always looking for ways to make its arduous production methods easier and cheaper because the industry is so volatile and not guarunteed to be profitable. But I think to make properly decent money as an artist you need to tour. This has been the model ever since streaming took hold. So yeah, its not going to be that profitable to be a faceless AI pumping out stuff into your spotify stream. I think the market will be in music for TV.
mixermachine 3y ago
If you can pay for a live performance and have to time to go there, yes. A lot of people can't and a 5-10$ Spotify/Apple Music/... account is all they can afford (if at all). AI music will disrupt this market. Spotify for example will try to produce their own AI music (like they already do with regular music). The Christmas playlist will then mainly contain their music. That saves a lot of money for the.
hobofan 3y ago
"Art" already puts more value on live performances and scarcity. Popular music consumption is largely removed from that. Yeah, the last two live mega tours (Taylor Swift and Beyoncé) have a tad more personality than the average artist, but the usual stuff that you would hear on the radio might as well be AI generated and live-performed by animatronics and a significant chunk of the audience wouldn't care or even notice.
- Nursie 3y ago
  See also vocaloid 'performers' such as Hatsune Miku or Ia in Japan.
- dagw 3y ago
  I think the first place we will see large scale AI music replace 'real' music is in the 'lo-fi' background music that just about every bar, restaurant and shop has going in a loop. Instead of having various playlists, the restaurant owner can just choose between some styles, moods and tempos in an app and the AI will autogenerate an endless steam of background music that matches the vibe they are going for.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
maxerickson 3y ago
They are already worth very little if more than one party can produce them at the push of a button.
- immibis 3y ago
  They made it illegal to produce exact replicas of Frozen at the push of a button; they could make AI illegal too. Except, the only reason it's illegal to copy Frozen is that it gives rich people less money. Generative AI gives rich people more money, so if anything, it'll be illegal not to use it.
  - maxerickson 3y ago
    It's not an apt analogy, unless you think that the production of generative images will be restricted to a few parties (because that is what copyright does, it restricts the right to copy to the originator). And then if it was restricted to a few parties, they still have to compete with human artists, they can't just charge whatever.
fennecfoxy 3y ago
Yes, this is why the most popular songs on the radio atm are all mass produced, generic (for their genre) crap that doesn't really stray beyond the proven money making methods. I mean people watch Love Island on TV for chrisssssakes. Humans can definitely be mindless consumers, where the sugar salt and fat in fast-food is the same as false drama, outrage, sex and violence in media. We all got buttons and they're so easy to push. Just look how popular TT is versus the type of content on there; mostly short-lived mindless stuff.

Nursie 3y ago

AI slop (to me) would be to pass this off as a song or something meritorious to listen to. IMHO this and things like it are basically a sub-class of comedy or satire, so I have time for this sort of thing. It's a joke, and should (can?) only be appreciated as artistic as someone saying "Wouldn't it be funny if ... ?" because now that casual thought can be turned into a pretty instant "well here it is! LOL!". I don't think you're supposed to appreciate it as music. Maybe I'm calling it wrong though. (edit - I will admit that upon further thought, I'm not sure how I feel about this when compared to, for example, Nina Gordon recording "Straight Outta Compton" as an accoustic, mildly lamenting singer-songwriter style number 20-some years ago. It's clearly in the same satrical arena but one took a lot more effort and imagination. Kinda, because there was a lot of effort and imagination that went into both the training data and the model, even if this specific output was only a passing joke. It's quite hard to reason about this stuff...)

michaelt 3y ago
In my experience, there's less of a distinction than you might think. A lot of satirical songs are absolute bangers, because (for example) to do a send-up of the tropes of X music, you must know all the tropes of X music, and be able to perform them. So a lot of satirical music is actually done by people with a lot of skill and passion for the thing being satirised. And because satirists don't have to worry about being predictable or unoriginal, they can put in more crowd-pleasing cliches per minute than 'serious' artists, giving them the most intense X of all X artists. (Not saying the MIT license is a banger though - just that some satirical songs are)
iamben 3y ago
Personal opinion, but I think you're calling it wrong. Also personal opinion, I absolutely hate the idea of it happening, buuut... I think it's a bit like everyone who said "black cabs in London have nothing to fear; X years of 'The Knowledge' will always be better than a guy with an App in an old Prius..." Except it was all wrong. Black cabs are probably still superior, but the bulk of people (and especially new customers) are all using Uber, because it's easier and they just don't care. It sucks that production factory, literally built to make money, AI created junk music will be a thing, but it most likely will. Someone will exploit that they can make a ton of cash with low risk and budget. They'll have the connections to, despite initial (somewhat) faux outrage from the public/press, get radio play/playlisted online ("probably even 'ironic' addition from the hipster music crowd"). The song will be an earworm, and aside from the musicians that hear all the flaws, the passive every day mom and pop listeners will get the hook stuck in their head and it'll just be another great tune like any other. I don't think we'll replace 'celebrity', I think that'll still happen, and I think maybe greater appreciation will happen to 'real musicians' (with a face!). But 'everyday' disposable pop (like all those one hit wonder tunes that are still played in nightclubs, pubs, throwback radio, wedding discos) - that's going to be disrupted massively.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

insin 3y ago

Suno links have already become what grey screenshots of ChatGPT were just after it came out, listened to a few at first and now I just keep on scrolling.

disqard 3y ago
I had a similar thought -- my perspective: There will be a TON of these 60-second tracks, and no one wants to listen for anywhere near that long while skimming a feed, so these will now be ignored.

chilmers 3y ago

To me the feeling of AI generated content is less "slop" and more "in-flight magazine". It can have a surface sheen of quality that you can lure you in, but you realise it's devoid of any vitality or soul.

Max-q 3y ago
When recorded music was invented, musicians protested. Recorded music was devoid of any vitality or soul. Recorded music still became a hit. Then we got the synthesizer. Again we got the same complaints, lifeless and without soul. The synthesizer still became a hit. Now the next step is happening, and we see the same complaints all over. Only time will show if the next step will happen anyway. My gut feeling tells me that AI art will gain acceptance over time, and we will just think of it as "art" or "music", just as we did with recorded mysic and synthetic sounds.
- piva00 3y ago
  You are just skipping the step that all of it had the human element considered, which to all of us is a very intrinsic part of "art". When AI generates a piece of entertainment it's ok to just call it entertainment, it's not art until AI actually has something we can relate to as consciousness (aka a "soul").
  - The_Colonel 3y ago
    Human is still writing the prompt. That's your human element. The prompt can be detailed, creative, and innovative. Kinda like a composer comes up with an idea for a new piece. But now the composer won't need the technical ability to translate it into musical notation.
    - vasco 3y ago
      Not sure if writing the prompt is the human element because an AI can easily write prompts. I think a stronger human element is in the training data (while that training data isn't dominated by AI generated content itself).

hobo_mark 3y ago

If you ever turn the radio on or hear the spotify weekly top playlist, it's not like contemporary cookie cutter pop music is any better. At least with this anyone can quickly experiment quirky new ideas!