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

Stable-Audio-Demo

stability-ai.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–249 of 249 posts

Re: Stable-Audio-Demo

#241

Post by greycol »

joecarrot wrote: post #238

Why are AI developers so goddamned keen on having it make art, one of the few kinds of work that human beings actually LIKE doing? We could use AI to be a CPA, or to write citations for a paper, but noooo, AI has to be a painter and a musician. It's almost like the software developers are jealous that someone out there is having a good time and want to take it from them. Also miss me with that 'AI enables me (a scrub…

I'd bet the 'scrubs' making AI art are enjoying it so to twist your words why would you force them to do the do work they don't enjoy (learning to paint) to get the part they do. You obviously wouldn't decry a painter for not making their art by carving marble or the Mona Lisa for not being as big as The Creation of Adam (funilly enough the Mona Lisa took longer to paint). Though I do feel for the 'real artists' who probably aren't enjoying being forced by economic considerations to output what they view as crap quality using those tools.

Having said that I bet you're seeing many more developers creating AI art stuff because frankly there are many more developers who enjoy making art and being creative that than there are developers who enjoy creating AI CPA or AI citation stuff. So the getting-rid-of-unenjoyable-work-AI stuff is mainly being made by those seeking a profit and it's naturally much less open as they'll sell it as soloutions to those seeking it.

Re: Stable-Audio-Demo

#242

Post by throw10920 »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #227
throw10920 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you require licensing fees for training data, you kill open source ML. I don't think this is true. There's a huge amount of public domain works, as well as stuff licensed under permissive copyleft licenses, that can be used. But, even if it did kill off open-source ML, it would still be necessary, because it's morally wrong to train ML models on copyrighted content without compensating the copyright owners (on t…

I’m sympathetic, but currently the courts don’t agree. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39364447 Morals are different from the law, but you seek a legal remedy, and those aren’t going well.

Doesn't the Ars Technica article of that post state that the courts have not rejected the claim of copyright infringement?

> failed to provide evidence supporting any of their claims except for direct copyright infringement

(emphasis mine)

Where are the courts saying that models can be trained on copyrighted content? (I believe that it's possible but unless I'm missing something I don't see it in that Ars article)

Re: Stable-Audio-Demo

#245

Post by notfed »

joecarrot wrote: post #238

Why are AI developers so goddamned keen on having it make art, one of the few kinds of work that human beings actually LIKE doing? We could use AI to be a CPA, or to write citations for a paper, but noooo, AI has to be a painter and a musician. It's almost like the software developers are jealous that someone out there is having a good time and want to take it from them. Also miss me with that 'AI enables me (a scrub…

I assume you're just being tongue-in-cheekfully dramatic, but the answer of course, is that there are AIs for those things, but they're under much less demand and are much less controversial.

Re: Stable-Audio-Demo

#246

Post by frabcus »

fenomas wrote: post #135
frabcus wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I think trained models are derived works of all the training data. Just like a translation of a book is a derived works of the original. Or a binary compiled output is a derived works of some source code.

Wikipedia: > In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyrightable elements of ... the underlying work A trained model fails that on two counts, doesn't it? Both the "includes" part, and the fact that a model is itself not an expressive work of authorship.

I'm not sure. If it fails, then I reckon a binary compiled from source code fails top.

There's nothing creative about the act of a compiler, it is automatic, just like the training run of an LLM.

And no part of the original source code is in the binary output.

And yet, binaries are a derived work from the source code that went into them.

So something is up! I am not a lawyer though.

Re: Stable-Audio-Demo

#247

Post by fenomas »

frabcus wrote: post #246
fenomas wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia: > In copyright law, a derivative work is an expressive creation that includes major copyrightable elements of ... the underlying work A trained model fails that on two counts, doesn't it? Both the "includes" part, and the fact that a model is itself not an expressive work of authorship.

I'm not sure. If it fails, then I reckon a binary compiled from source code fails top. There's nothing creative about the act of a compiler, it is automatic, just like the training run of an LLM. And no part of the original source code is in the binary output. And yet, binaries are a derived work from the source code that went into them. So something is up! I am not a lawyer though.

> And no part of the original source code is in the binary output.

It's not about whether the binary includes the raw text of the source, but whether it copies the expressive content. Anything expressive (i.e. copyrightable) in a compiled binary must have come from the sourcecode, so that's what makes it a derived work.

But the same isn't true of LLMs, which are more like "data about their inputs", than "a transformed version of their inputs".

Re: Stable-Audio-Demo

#248

Post by reissbaker »

emadm wrote: post #178
reissbaker wrote: post #7

This is incredibly good compared to SOTA music models (MusicGen, MusicLM). It looks like there's also a product page where you can subscribe to use it, similar to Midjourney: https://www.stableaudio.com/ Sadly it's not open-weight and it doesn't look like there's an API (again like Midjourney): you subscribe monthly to generate audio in their UI, rather than having something developers can integrate or wrap.

There is a CC licensed version soon plus API. Models are advancing very fast, will be quite the year for music.

Any chance of a commercially licensed version? CC is alright for research but I feel like the real meat of a lot of these models is finetuning.

(Or, will the API support finetuning?)

Re: Stable-Audio-Demo

#249

Post by schleck8 »

squeaky-clean wrote: post #172
schleck8 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome and Chromium are virtually identical except for Google services, which aren't required to do anything with the browser except for installing Chrome extensions that can alternatively be sideloaded, so this is nitpicking.

Don't forget media DRM built into Chrome but not Chromium.

Widevine is a Google service so I didn't forget it. You can still play media if you dislike DRM usually, at =< 720p that is, which is a lesser security standard. I'm not even sure whether it involves additional servers.
Post reply on HN