Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tidal AI Policy

tidal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 359 posts

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#141

Post by esikich »

keiferski wrote: post #116
someguyiguess wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a human behind AI-generated music too. A human writes the prompts. Your distinction seems rather arbitrary.

Typing “make me an electronic guitar song about a bad breakup” is a whole lot different than learning to play the instrument yourself and conveying your own emotions from your real experience into a song that you write and perform. If you can’t see how these are fundamentally different things, I don’t know what to tell you.

Do you really think that's the only way to do it? I spend hours refining the output, slicing things up, redoing certain parts, tossing it into the DAW and compressing, adding effects, etc. I mean, if you think one shot prompts are the only way to use AI to make music fine, but you're being intentionally obtuse.

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#142

Post by runarberg »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #111
obloid wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've encountered AI copies of songs from popular artists, hopefully this will stop or at least slow that down. I suspect the only reason those songs are uploaded is because people will accidentally listen to it and then the up loader gets the streaming revenue.

But that's not a new issue per se, low effort "covers" / "remixes" of songs has been an issue for a long time. Bonus point if said low-effort remix includes the original artist in the artist fields, so it shows up in the recommendations of fans of the original artist for a lot of accidental listens. But AI does seem to make it easier.

When low effort goes to no effort one can expect the problem to worsen by several orders of magnitude.

Also not that it takes skill to come up with a remix/cover/homage of a song that is close enough to the original that people can enjoy it like the original, but not so close that you are just plagiarizing it. So this problem before AI is limited to talented musicians who for some reason would rather copy somebody else then to make their own music.

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#143

Post by elicash »

esafak wrote: post #25
k__ wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, their incentive is to promote AI music, since they don't have to pay royalties for them.

How so? People want to avoid it.

I don't agree with the overall point, but what they are saying is that if Tidal makes a "lofi hip hop mix beats" playlist, then they have to pay a nickel to an artist if they direct the user to their song, but NOTHING if they direct to someone who uploaded an AI song. So that's an extra nickel of profit for pointing to the AI song.

In reality, I don't think this is how it'll shake out. But it's a valid argument.

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#144

Post by andai »

vlian2088 wrote: post #127
selectodude wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get both the white nationalist and the antisemite sides, yes.

as opposed to ye olde twitter where only wholesome racism was allowed https://web.archive.org/web/20181130015402/https://pasteboar... https://web.archive.org/web/20180827011518/https://pasteboar... https://web.archive.org/web/20180827011519/https://pasteboar...

Well they defined racism as "you can only be racist if you have power" and they defined having power as being white, so this is totally kosher.

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#145

Post by tshaddox »

neutronicus wrote: post #114
keiferski wrote: post #30

I really hope someone makes a music platform in the future that is verified as human-made. Music is about connecting to human emotions, not poor facsimiles of it. Tie it to in-person concerts and it might actually work as a business, as well as logistically – maybe the company can be a record producer in disguise and physically meet every musician they host.

That seems like a hard line to draw for EDM, which I suppose, plenty of people have indeed refused to class as "human-made" over the years. You'd probably need to be more generally back-to-basics (instruments-only, no EDM).

To me it’s less about the technologies used to produce the audio. If a human has put some creative effort into it, even if it’s mostly curating AI-generated audio, I’m in principle fine with that. But if little to no effort was put into it, it’s slop by definition.

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#146

Post by mathgeek »

keiferski wrote: post #30

I really hope someone makes a music platform in the future that is verified as human-made. Music is about connecting to human emotions, not poor facsimiles of it. Tie it to in-person concerts and it might actually work as a business, as well as logistically – maybe the company can be a record producer in disguise and physically meet every musician they host.

Let me preface this by agreeing that we should have platforms for only human-generated music.

> Music is about connecting to human emotions, not poor facsimiles of it.

Like most things, this is an overgeneralization. In general, I agree, but not always.

While most AI-generated content is not going to appeal to most people, it's wrong to say that all AI-generated music is not about what music is about. Personally I find _some_ AI generated music to be amazingly fun to listen to, but mostly it's parodies or works that are essentially built on top of existing media.

A creative person using AI well can produce art that people enjoy and which adds to our culture (I selectively choose not to say "create" here to avoid that very overloaded connotation w.r.t. AI creations). That is not to say that most of the work that comes out of AI needs to exist or does any of those things.

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#147

Post by graemep »

virgildotcodes wrote: post #102
Sharlin wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I'm not sure if you actually haven't checked it since, but will give you the benefit of the doubt. Accounts pushing white supremacy, the reversion of women's rights, hatred towards other on the basis of their race or religion, climate change denial, denial of science and promotion of pseudoscience, etc etc. are heavily promoted across the platform and get millions of engagements. If you create a new account, the majo…

So much the same as Facebook?

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#148

Post by neutronicus »

armchairhacker wrote: post #125
postalcoder wrote: post #49

AI music has taken over small businesses like coffee shops and restaurants. AI music drives me nuts because, to me, it still is very much deep in an uncanny valley. That said, I can't blame the businesses because they are all (dis)incentive driven. The music industry has stepped up its efforts globally to crack down on small businesses that play copyrighted music. They actually hire people to go into these places and…

Why don’t they play indie alternative pop music? It’s easier than ever to create, surely there are many bands with almost no audience who would give away their music for free. The reason may be discovery, but they could band together and make a centralized platform.

Because then the coffee shop has to curate it or the band needs to market to the coffee shop.

Incentives are mismatched here - the indie band benefits from being noticed and sought out, the coffee shop wants to set a vibe without distracting or irritating anyone (which music can do simply by repeating, if you don't curate a large enough collection).

So unless your playlist is, like, part of the product you're selling (which it is for a number of coffee shops to be fair), you just look for something like "10 hours of lo-fi beats to study to" and throw it on.

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#149

Post by jrm4 »

dkhenry wrote: post #86

I just want Tidal and Spotify to give me the option to fully opt-out of AI generated music. I don't want it mixed in with my music. If others want it great, but I want the option to not engage with the content.

Nothing personal, but there's something hilarious about "I demand a quick and easy solution to a likely practically impossible problem once you get into details" -- in opposition to AI.

Re: Tidal AI Policy

#150

Post by jrm4 »

preetham_rangu wrote: post #35

The detection problem is genuinely hard. Even desktop AI agents I've been working with recently can control Spotify, fill forms, navigate apps — all indistinguishable from human interaction at the OS level. If that's hard to detect at the application layer, detecting AI-generated music at the audio layer seems like a cat and mouse game that Tidal will struggle to win without self-reporting from uploaders.

Let's go with impossible.
Post reply on HN