4 ms·

Completely understandable. I had this opinion for a long time, but only recently was I personally affected, but that made me even more convinced. I was listen

Completely understandable. I had this opinion for a long time, but only recently was I personally affected, but that made me even more convinced. I was listening to my new releases playlist on Apple Music and listened to a track that sounded nice, but also a little generic. I don’t know exactly what prompted me to check, but it had all the signs of something fishy going on like generic cover image, the artist page showed a crazy output of singles last year (all the same generic images), unspecific metadata and - to my surprise - I found other Reddit posts about this artist being AI. Now, a lot of music is generic and goes through so many hands you can hardly call it a personal piece of art. But even then, there’s always some kind of connection. I guess that’s why I felt betrayed. I thought AI generated art was wrong before, but I didn’t expect to feel this mix of anger and disappointment.

JohnFen 9mo ago
Yeah, I agree. For me, music (like all fine art) is about human connection. It's the artist telling me something human and personal. It's not entirely about the aesthetics of the music. The provenance of the art is very important. If I feel that connection with a song and it turns out that the song wasn't made by a person (it hasn't happened yet as far as I know), I have been deceived and would be furious. A song made by a person using AI as tool (rather than to generate the music) is different. What matters is that the song is actually an expression of humanity, not the tools used to make it. However, the presence of AI-generated music means that I am not really willing to buy music anymore unless it's either a few years old or I'm buying it at the merch table the artist has at a live performance.
jatora 9mo ago
[flagged]
- roywiggins 9mo ago
  They literally thought it was odd and generic, checked, and found it was AI and got pissed off. How is that "emotional cope"? They correctly guessed something was weird about it based on how it sounded!
  - jatora 9mo ago
    i was moreso responding to this statement: "What matters is that the song is actually an expression of humanity, not the tools used to make it." which is complete nonsense
    - Anamon 9mo ago
      Why do you think it is nonsense? Making music involves writing and arranging the score, playing the instruments, writing lyrics, singing, recording, mastering... each of these steps is hard work, takes practice, and by that fact alone will be unique to every person because, in some way, their whole life experience flows into it. GenAI music is writing a few words about how you'd like the result to sound. That's it. That's the entire original contribution. There is no individuality to it beyond that, because it's not someone making music, it's someone deciding about the weights in averaging together existing music that other people have actually worked for. That's not nonsense to me (and judging from the reaction to this news, neither is it to a large number of music fans). It's an absolutely massive, huge, decisive, qualitative difference.
      - jatora 8mo ago
        do you now see how reductive you are of the technology behind genAI? by reading your own comment does it not drive the point home that reducing music appreciation to the quoted comment is also hilariously reductive?
jamesrcole 9mo ago
We're in the very early stages of AI generated art. What will it be like in 10 years time? 20? 50? You might think it won't get much better. I think that's unlikely.
- emptyfile 9mo ago
  Art without human intent behind it, is simply not art.
  - jamesrcole 8mo ago
    And if there are aliens? I'm being serious. Why does it have to be human intent? And I think it is entirely feasible that at some point -- how far away, I don't know -- AI becomes superior to us in its appreciation of life and living.
    - adamauckland 8mo ago
      Art is all over the natural world, look at animals which build nests, arrange pebbles, choose shells etc.

JohnFen 9mo ago

Yeah, I agree. For me, music (like all fine art) is about human connection. It's the artist telling me something human and personal. It's not entirely about the aesthetics of the music. The provenance of the art is very important. If I feel that connection with a song and it turns out that the song wasn't made by a person (it hasn't happened yet as far as I know), I have been deceived and would be furious. A song made by a person using AI as tool (rather than to generate the music) is different. What matters is that the song is actually an expression of humanity, not the tools used to make it. However, the presence of AI-generated music means that I am not really willing to buy music anymore unless it's either a few years old or I'm buying it at the merch table the artist has at a live performance.

jatora 9mo ago

[flagged]

roywiggins 9mo ago
They literally thought it was odd and generic, checked, and found it was AI and got pissed off. How is that "emotional cope"? They correctly guessed something was weird about it based on how it sounded!
- jatora 9mo ago
  i was moreso responding to this statement: "What matters is that the song is actually an expression of humanity, not the tools used to make it." which is complete nonsense
  - Anamon 9mo ago
    Why do you think it is nonsense? Making music involves writing and arranging the score, playing the instruments, writing lyrics, singing, recording, mastering... each of these steps is hard work, takes practice, and by that fact alone will be unique to every person because, in some way, their whole life experience flows into it. GenAI music is writing a few words about how you'd like the result to sound. That's it. That's the entire original contribution. There is no individuality to it beyond that, because it's not someone making music, it's someone deciding about the weights in averaging together existing music that other people have actually worked for. That's not nonsense to me (and judging from the reaction to this news, neither is it to a large number of music fans). It's an absolutely massive, huge, decisive, qualitative difference.
    - jatora 8mo ago
      do you now see how reductive you are of the technology behind genAI? by reading your own comment does it not drive the point home that reducing music appreciation to the quoted comment is also hilariously reductive?

jamesrcole 9mo ago

We're in the very early stages of AI generated art. What will it be like in 10 years time? 20? 50? You might think it won't get much better. I think that's unlikely.

emptyfile 9mo ago
Art without human intent behind it, is simply not art.
- jamesrcole 8mo ago
  And if there are aliens? I'm being serious. Why does it have to be human intent? And I think it is entirely feasible that at some point -- how far away, I don't know -- AI becomes superior to us in its appreciation of life and living.
  - adamauckland 8mo ago
    Art is all over the natural world, look at animals which build nests, arrange pebbles, choose shells etc.