171–180 of 389 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's my attempt at humor, there is something about his short sentences and speech delivery that makes them very suitable for ballads: https://suno.com/song/9f731225-8844-44f1-9325-4078cf53c729
Hmm, I think a rambling song form would have been a better fit.
I almost feel compelled to take action against the corruption and crookedness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if you didn't know either way? Would you refuse to enjoy a song, until you were absolutely sure it was performed by a human?
It will depend on the person, but I think generally speaking, a song is but one aspect of an artist / the art of music; if you're a mass consumer that just has something playing in the background, it probably doesn't make a jot of difference (consider also "muzak" / elevator music), but if you're more of an active listener you may look into and enjoy the story behind the music and the artist as well. Personally I thi…
Asked ChatGPT first to convert the license to poem: https://suno.com/song/bdad5f22-a1f0-42fb-a3d8-572d289687ea "Publish, distribute, let your dreams take flight, Sub-license, sell, under stars or sunlight."
Encore, encore!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
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…
Algorithmic music has already been around for decades and it never became popular. In the 90's it was of interest only to a small group of academic music nerds. The same is true today. Avant-garde shit for nerds. No one wants to listen to it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had a similar reaction. We can still detect AI-generated images after years of progress; I think it's hasty to say they'll be indistinguishable any time soon.
Thing is, they don't have to be indistinguishable. They just have to be "good enough" to be a major disruption to that market. And it's not a particularly high bar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
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").
Earlier quoted context omitted.
music seemed really low quality to me as a musician. I wouldn't pay to listen to it
I doubt generative AI music is going to become popular as anything but background noise, but I think it will plausibly cut into various commercial uses of music in ads and whatnot. So while I don't think people are gonna be walking around with playlists of AI slop, businesses will be using it as a cost-effective option, which means it will be eating away at the gig potential for artists in the low-to-mid layers of th…
Thomas Watson, president of IBM, 1943
I think as they get better at making these great middle of the road songs, edgy music will reemerge. Whatever AI will be good at, will immediately devalue, in the realm of arts. Just how photography gave way to non-realistic art and how drum machines made sloppy drums (or ridiculous apex twins) hip. Then, the artifacts we see now as flaws will create its own sub genre.
So I see three ways this flows: mediocrity will be even more available, which will make artists who make mediocare music even less succesfull, pushing all human music further in human direction, except those using the unwanted artifacts of this new tech to create new sub genres.
Music, art, fashion is in the end all about changes. What we make now mostly means something in relation to what was already there. It's a big conversation, spanning millenia, and this isn't the last word.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that the real Turing test - does it feel like it has a soul?
I want to run a experiment on humans to see if we are worthy of a turing test. 1. We tell a human (test subject) that they will be a judge but they are a test subject. We will tell them that there will be two chats -- one will have a human and the other will have a computer and they need to decide which is which. 2. We will then give them access to two real time chats but the twist is both of them will be humans. 3.…
Dunno, but it could probably get published and I'd at least read the comments when it gets posted to HN.
Tricky bit is the design in the signaling and instructions so as to avoid biasing the results while still allowing the desired 'both are human' response. Something like a check box for each chat if that chat was a robot. If you have the budget I'd also run the control Turing test, human x computer, as well as a computer x computer test.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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").
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.