3 ms·

Doesn't topping a popularity chart mean that it was "good" at least to many people?

techpression 9mo ago
Considering how cheap and easy it is to buy views/likes/subscribers I wouldn’t trust it blindly. Somehow I feel that people pushing AI music also would game the system, but I don’t have any proof unfortunately.
happytoexplain 9mo ago
Lots of things are "good" in some contexts and "bad" in others. You may disagree that the mere existence of a list that omits AI is "good" for some people, but those people disagree with you.
reaperducer 9mo ago
Doesn't topping a popularity chart mean that it was "good" at least to many people? So we should start awarding Michelin stars to McDonald's?
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 9mo ago
  We don't they have their judges so it's more like the oscars: an industry award
- sejje 9mo ago
  If you wanted to explain why McDonald's was so popular, you would have to compliment the product a lot, or lie.
  - LunaSea 9mo ago
    If "complimenting the product" means: "a lot of fat, a lot of sugar, relatively low price, relatively fast order fulfilment", then sure.
LunaSea 9mo ago
Cocaine is also popular, does that make it good?
- bitshiftfaced 9mo ago
  There are well-known negative side effects. What are the side effects to listening to AI music? If there are negative side effects, then I'd guess they'd be shared with non-AI music, since they sound pretty close to the same by now. Or, maybe the "negative" side effect from the industry's perspective is that the price of listening to music will drop.
  - LunaSea 9mo ago
    The largest side effect is that music won't be made by humans anymore.
    - pawelduda 9mo ago
      Is someone banning humans from making music?
      - LunaSea 9mo ago
        No, but if something is going to be close to free to produce the consequence will be that no commercial piece of music will be incentivized to be produced by humans. Commercial music isn't the only way to make music, but it pays people that want to professionally work as musicians.
        pawelduda 9mo ago
        Looking at the surface, it is true, but there are caveats: - Not all musicians are in the field because it pays, some of them haven't earned a cent - There are talented people who would like to create music but are forced to work long hours, which leaves them drained. Perhaps in the future, humans won't have to work that much, which will allow them to pursue creative hobbies such as music making - Artists will be able to continue performing live, which will act as a huge filter for the AI-generated content and keep paying them. Aside from that I agree, though musicians just one of many groups disrupted by AI and I wouldn't say they'll be the ones hurt most by it, mostly because they can continue to "exist" outside of the Internet, and experiencing music live could become more popular because of it. A lot of assumptions here, I know
pawelduda 9mo ago
Recently, there was an outrage when "Claire Obscur: Expedition 33" grabbed record-breaking amount of game awards (deservingly so, it's an excellent game) and somehow it surfaced that some minor development placeholder assets (which devs forgot to replace with actual ones due to QA oversight) were AI generated. Suddenly the entire game became "AI slop" and even got some of the awards revoked. A lot of people complaining are doing it just for the sake of complaining, because anti-AI virtue signaling nets them clout, meanwhile they will happily scroll entire timelines of edited photos, movies which are nothing else than fake reality "slop".
- happytoexplain 9mo ago
  You're inventing groups of people composed of the worst qualities of your "enemies" and insisting they are large in number, based on nothing. This is common low-quality internet "those people" complaining - the polar opposite of giving the benefit of the doubt. People generally have nuanced opinions not represented solely by whatever Tweets are popular, and this is true of basically every single topic.
  - pawelduda 9mo ago
    "Enemies" is your word, not mine. I would say "hypocrisy" is a better fit. A pinch of AI content is bad, while photoshopping/postprocessing/etc. is normalized. It's all converging into the same thing, only the process is different There is a difference between an AI critic who dislikes the AI output based on their sense of taste/aesthetic/soullessness and someone who likes something until they learn that there's 0.0001% of AI content in it, which suddenly turns it into abomination. I agree that the latter tends to be the louder group, but it is a group nonetheless and I clearly did not invent jumping on a bandwagon.
deleted 9mo ago
[deleted]

Considering how cheap and easy it is to buy views/likes/subscribers I wouldn’t trust it blindly. Somehow I feel that people pushing AI music also would game the system, but I don’t have any proof unfortunately.

happytoexplain 9mo ago

Lots of things are "good" in some contexts and "bad" in others. You may disagree that the mere existence of a list that omits AI is "good" for some people, but those people disagree with you.

reaperducer 9mo ago

Doesn't topping a popularity chart mean that it was "good" at least to many people? So we should start awarding Michelin stars to McDonald's?

Am4TIfIsER0ppos 9mo ago
We don't they have their judges so it's more like the oscars: an industry award
sejje 9mo ago
If you wanted to explain why McDonald's was so popular, you would have to compliment the product a lot, or lie.
- LunaSea 9mo ago
  If "complimenting the product" means: "a lot of fat, a lot of sugar, relatively low price, relatively fast order fulfilment", then sure.

LunaSea 9mo ago

Cocaine is also popular, does that make it good?

bitshiftfaced 9mo ago
There are well-known negative side effects. What are the side effects to listening to AI music? If there are negative side effects, then I'd guess they'd be shared with non-AI music, since they sound pretty close to the same by now. Or, maybe the "negative" side effect from the industry's perspective is that the price of listening to music will drop.
- LunaSea 9mo ago
  The largest side effect is that music won't be made by humans anymore.
  - pawelduda 9mo ago
    Is someone banning humans from making music?
    - LunaSea 9mo ago
      No, but if something is going to be close to free to produce the consequence will be that no commercial piece of music will be incentivized to be produced by humans. Commercial music isn't the only way to make music, but it pays people that want to professionally work as musicians.
      - pawelduda 9mo ago
        Looking at the surface, it is true, but there are caveats: - Not all musicians are in the field because it pays, some of them haven't earned a cent - There are talented people who would like to create music but are forced to work long hours, which leaves them drained. Perhaps in the future, humans won't have to work that much, which will allow them to pursue creative hobbies such as music making - Artists will be able to continue performing live, which will act as a huge filter for the AI-generated content and keep paying them. Aside from that I agree, though musicians just one of many groups disrupted by AI and I wouldn't say they'll be the ones hurt most by it, mostly because they can continue to "exist" outside of the Internet, and experiencing music live could become more popular because of it. A lot of assumptions here, I know

pawelduda 9mo ago

Recently, there was an outrage when "Claire Obscur: Expedition 33" grabbed record-breaking amount of game awards (deservingly so, it's an excellent game) and somehow it surfaced that some minor development placeholder assets (which devs forgot to replace with actual ones due to QA oversight) were AI generated. Suddenly the entire game became "AI slop" and even got some of the awards revoked. A lot of people complaining are doing it just for the sake of complaining, because anti-AI virtue signaling nets them clout, meanwhile they will happily scroll entire timelines of edited photos, movies which are nothing else than fake reality "slop".

happytoexplain 9mo ago
You're inventing groups of people composed of the worst qualities of your "enemies" and insisting they are large in number, based on nothing. This is common low-quality internet "those people" complaining - the polar opposite of giving the benefit of the doubt. People generally have nuanced opinions not represented solely by whatever Tweets are popular, and this is true of basically every single topic.
- pawelduda 9mo ago
  "Enemies" is your word, not mine. I would say "hypocrisy" is a better fit. A pinch of AI content is bad, while photoshopping/postprocessing/etc. is normalized. It's all converging into the same thing, only the process is different There is a difference between an AI critic who dislikes the AI output based on their sense of taste/aesthetic/soullessness and someone who likes something until they learn that there's 0.0001% of AI content in it, which suddenly turns it into abomination. I agree that the latter tends to be the louder group, but it is a group nonetheless and I clearly did not invent jumping on a bandwagon.

deleted 9mo ago

[deleted]