Will be interesting to see how this all develops. Completely AI generated music still seems far fetched. There still needs to be a man-in-the-loop. I could imagine an AI composition tool, generating midi to feed through whatever. But an AI model simply printing a mastered track? I don’t know how it’d work.

Autonomous driving is an example of how wildly wrong our predictions were for a timeline. It turns out humans are pretty damn good at driving

Autonomous driving errors potentially result in deaths, but in the arts the worst is a single dodgy song or painting.

This tech is here now and progressing rapidly. Check the original links, it’s not far fetched.

Regulated in what ways?

People would like to have money to save, and we view wealth by how much you earned rather than how much you spent. If the same person earned $50k but spent $1k we view them on paper as wealthier than the ones who spent $50k, perhaps if we met them we might think the $50k spenders were wealthier because of their outer expressions of wealth, but we would only assume they have that much spending power because their balance is that high.

What they could have done is block companies from using their works to train the AI’s. The weights come from training the network, that’s why these artists are now facing really screwed up people training artworks with their own works before gleefully messaging them that they’re going to be out of business. You block the training, you block the AI, simple as that.

Don’t get me wrong, AI a is a tremendous tool and you cannot stop it, the issue is this is AI implemented to target consumers, not creatives, used like this it’s replacing people rather than augmenting or enhancing them. and unlike previous industrial revolutions this doesn’t open up new opportunities. It takes the whole creative process away from humans, and without value to our creativity then what are we? Really think about that question, what your identity is, what your problem solving skills are, what your value is full stop in society, if there is no value to any aspect of your creativity then you are just a net drain, a flesh robot. It’s greed from already rich people who don’t value others or what they do. Instead of moving forwards and upwards towards a pinnacle apex society we really could be destined to go down the drain, not because AI is sentient and takes over or such nonsense, but because greed and convenience and people screw themselves over in a rush to the bottom before we have the mechanisms in place to replace every job and remove the need for an economy. Again, 80% of US GDP is intangible services, music is only one small part of this.

Longertermists, like Elon Musk, want to replace themselves, and everyone, with robots.

For instance with regards copyright and identity theft - in requiring express permission to use materials for training. Enforcing a complete record of all materials used (testable by retaining with the listed materials, any discrepancy should result in heavy fines). Legal recourse that states if your material (or material derived from your material) was used without your permission the company or persons responsible are liable for unlimited damages unless they immediately remove content (I.e they would have to retrain from scratch and remove all materials created with weights derived from your materials). Right to block use of terms or generative methods designed to be related to yourself or your works or to create works in any way inspired by your works (or works derived from your works).

Then there’s malicious usage - manipulation of historical record - making faked images of politicians doing the dirty, or hoax moonlanding photos (already done and out there), dilution of the currency of knowledge, using GANs to make completely fake people for e.g. fraudulent company websites to them them appear legit (read an article about this yesterday).

You don’t have to attempt to fully block the use of AI for creation of creative works by consumers, which would be extremely tricky, nor outlaw AI, but you can control derivative works, enforce labeling, control your own identity and usage.

When you create a tool for creatives e.g, a mastering tool that uses AI you would be filling it with your own data, not data from experts in the field. That is still achievable, it doesn’t hobble AI, it just hobbles those trying to profit from your work without paying you for your work.

…And hey my suggestions here are less draconian than enforcing fixed royalty collection for every work derived, given that would mean a royalty for every single use of an AI as after all every use would to a certain extent reference your training material if it was in there even in a single track, snippet or sample.

Not understanding what any of that has to do with a "consumer" using AI to create their own music.

So basically the 800 million jobs lost to AI need to go to regulating and monitoring AI, or AI will destroy us.

Go look at what’s happening in the concept art world. And also read up on AI, how it works, what it’s capable of. Consumers want to consume familiar content, films with specific actors, specific bands etc.

We protect this already via copyright laws.

Currently with AI this is undefined, if you train an AI with the complete works of the foo fighters and then generate new foos songs you could sell the results. It produces songs that are like unknown foos tracks. Dave Grohl meanwhile would have to go and fight in court (while a bazillion other people continue to release fake foos content online).

If you take back control over your information, over what you produce in this scenario then you essentially hobble AI that’s designed for consumers to go and say “I want something foo fighters ish with a touch of birds”. It doesn’t go after the consumers using it (unless they’re training it), it goes after the companies creating the algorithms. It doesn’t hobble it for AI tools for creatives, Dave can still go into his studio and use an AI tool to master his records because they will have permission to use their own datasets to train their tools. He can use an AI Drummer that’s been trained with material that the source artists have give permission to use.

Right now it’s use then excuse, it should be ask permission first when it comes to this technology.

Unfortunately what we call AI is itself statistical analysis, so it’s going to be very good at regulating and monitoring. Humans will only be required as arbiters.

I suspect that AI will find its place, and human-made music will also continue. Everyone knows people who jump on new trends just because they are new. And we also know people who reject new just because it threatens establishment. You can see it now. Some people only want to hear new stuff, others reject new music and only want old stuff, and yet others listen to both new and old.

And it's inevitable that some AI music will be very good. Why wouldn't it be? No composers/writers write all great songs. Everyone writes a good one, and then a not as good one, I guess good being defined by its popularity success level. Why wouldn't AI do the same thing? It's actually true that a broken clock is correct twice a day, and people actually win Power Ball. I suspect AI's success at writing music will enjoy far better odds that that, having been instructed by programming and its own progressive learning curve about the specifics of the most popular music over the past centuries. It's possible that eventually, it might be impossible for AI to compose a song that would not be very popular (i.e. good) to some specific human audience.

Personally, I'm less than welcoming to it, but trying to stop it is like stopping the proliferation of the industrial revolution, cars, airplanes, TV, computers, internet and cell phones. And there are enough people out there who simply embrace new things because they are new to keep it proliferating and profitable.

Although I think it's important to question whether or not AI actually exists yet in 2022, or is it still just a marketing buzz? Is it AI if the machines lack self-awareness and cognizance? Or is it still just an appearance of intelligence created by processes being directed by human-created coding? Can the machine exist, grow and learn without humans? IMHO, the day it can be its own audience is the day AI exists; when computers make music for other computers to enjoy; maybe even music that is totally meaningless to humans. Where is it written that if computers become intelligent, they will toil to serve humans? And then it will no longer be artificial. It'll be alternate intelligence, not related to humanity beyond the fact that humanity initially created it. But will humans then, be its god? Or will we become the "alternate" intelligence?

It’s not a sentient thing it’s just a really great analysis tool, the danger isn’t smarts, it’s dumbs - the damage humans will do for greed and convenience.

Think of it like using fission for bombs instead of power, with the bombs we pretty soon learned it was a really stupid regrettable idea even though it gave clear military superiority, for power it… well ok, also we learned where we’re drawbacks eventually, but mostly it was net positive for humanity. Different uses have different outcomes, AI is just a very useful flexible tool that can be used for all sorts, it’s not really fair to blame AI itself which is why I try to call this use “consumer focussed”, it’s the way it’s being used here that matters. Not all fire is bad fire.

Teenage girls are never going to scream for AI music. Teenage boys are never going to air drum to AI music.

It'll have it's place, just like musak did in the malls and grocery stores when I was a kid.

AI will be indistinguishable from a person in any virtual world, which are set to explode.

All it would take is the right sound/image/personality combination in a virtual world.

I suppose so...but what about, for example, drum vsti's that have all sorts of sounds and beats based on famous bands and musicians. Or guitar amp emulations. Seems sort of impossible to control except for saying "don't use our name or our image", (so people make up a similar name to get around it). And I'm not sure I really get the difference between regulating that stuff for "consumers" versus musicians who consume similar tools for their own use.

Isn't there already a virtual star of sorts in Japan?

https://www.businessinsider.co.za/ai...bsites-2022-10

That's great and all, but nobody's going to chuck panties on stage for the AI boy band.

Poor choice of analogy on my part. the arts involve human expression, experience, opinions, taste and all subject to someone else’s interpretation. That’s all in addition to classifying the components/instruments making up a piece of music. How one would train or classify that I have no idea. I know people are trying. And the results are quite laughable sounding so far. All the effort, compute hours, testing, to come up with a method for model training, to generate something that sounds like music a human made.

I did check the original links. It seems like the same level of progress as earlier in the year. Considering how rapidly GAN’s and now diffusion models exploded with image generation, maybe it isn’t that far off. Or maybe it is. I guess the more important question is what will it be?

And no weirdo would ever have a blowup doll as their girlfriend.

Oh shit, look who's back: Captain Contrary and his Merry Band of Shit Disturbers.

Some desperate guy getting off on a blow-up doll has nothing to do with that and you know it too. Dude is not emotionally invested in that doll.

Keep it coming... I know this is your blow-up doll.

There will always be a place for human artists, for sure.

AI will be able to create characters that make and perform music though, that people will totally buy into. There very well might be virtual panties being thrown at virtual boy bands, people fall in love in online games a lot. I'm sure they can fall in lust too.

I mean, any well known animated character is a virtual star. Just match that with the right AI generated music. Add a 3D world that makes everyone animated and its an even playing field.

I probably give too much credit to the human race...

Let the record show that it's you that is making some comment that could potentially throw this perfectly fine convo into an argument.

Look at the video I posted of the virtual pop star.

I do believe people will absolutely become "emotionally invested" in things whether they are real or not. Whether they are created by humans or not. All of art is artifice....that's why they call it art!

People are emotionally connected to nature and animals, and humans didn't create any of that.

I'm pretty sure you all are just bots.

Jesus man, what is your problem?

Gorillaz was the same and they were considered legit. I guess this shows you don't even need a 3D world. AI could totally put something like this together top to bottom, soon.

Well, I'm going to bounce because I don't really give a shit about AI generated music and have zero skin in the game, so have fun.