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

AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

showbiz411.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 395 posts

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#291

Post by ssl-3 »

Gigachad wrote: post #285
ssl-3 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People were responding with period-correct, insipid “wow beautiful ” replies for decades before we had bots to do it. It was noise when it was only people; it's still just noise when it also includes bots.

What makes it noise is less the actual comment itself. If I showed someone a piece of art in person and they said this to me, it would be a genuine response. What makes this particular instance noise is it reeks of mass automated messaging with no thought behind it. These comments are generic because they aren't people commenting on the thing they saw, they are just templates being spammed out on mass so they make th…

Perhaps.

To me, this present-day noise is indistinguishable from the pre-bot noise. It's the same noise, in that both things are just noise of that shape. "How beautiful!" "I really feel this one!" "I love this song!"

Sometimes, the signal-to-noise ratio is better. Sometimes it's pretty bad. It always has been this way in online discourse -- especially with things that appeal to old folks.

In a track where the protagonist primarily complains about feeling old, it makes sense that most of the comments are that of what old folks have always written online.

(Are these particular comments primarily bot spam? Maybe. I peered into the depths a bit, and accounts for the top comments I looked at had been around for years. That isn't evidence for or against a well-orchestrated long con, but orchestration is hard and people who write insipid comments are plentiful.)

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#292

Post by Rebuff5007 »

topherhunt wrote: post #283
yoz-y wrote: post #243

Auto play has been a way for me to find new music. I stopped using it because now every listen is accompanied by a a nagging feeling that the song that is playing might be AI generated. Now I just go and look for new albums from bands I know I like. I wish there was a pre-2023 filter for the algorithmic feed.

I'm sorry but this attitude baffles me, and I think it's the sort of thing that will sound so silly in 20 years that we'll have collectively memory-holed it. If you're turned off from listening to Spotify recoms becausue they _might_ be AI and you _might_ not know, what does that say to you about the disconnect between your aesthetic judgment and your values? If you're listening to Spotify autoplays and a shitty song…

I see your point, and think its valid, but here is a counter:

Content is graded on both instant appeal (e.g. rotten tomatoes "popcornmeter") and artistic appeal (e.g. rotten tomatoes "tomatometer").

I firmly believe that AI generated content cannot have any artistic appeal, because I believe art is fundamentally an invocation of human expression. This might be fine in some contexts, but in general I'd prefer consuming content from groups that I trust to strike a good balance between these types of appeal (e.g. A24 movies).

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#293

Post by cornholio »

topherhunt wrote: post #283
yoz-y wrote: post #243

Auto play has been a way for me to find new music. I stopped using it because now every listen is accompanied by a a nagging feeling that the song that is playing might be AI generated. Now I just go and look for new albums from bands I know I like. I wish there was a pre-2023 filter for the algorithmic feed.

I'm sorry but this attitude baffles me, and I think it's the sort of thing that will sound so silly in 20 years that we'll have collectively memory-holed it. If you're turned off from listening to Spotify recoms becausue they _might_ be AI and you _might_ not know, what does that say to you about the disconnect between your aesthetic judgment and your values? If you're listening to Spotify autoplays and a shitty song…

Well, let's make a revoltingly fun analogy: say a hamburger restaurant opened in your city, that openly admits it puts (ethically acquired) human meat in some of its products. You don't have to worry about the legality of the venture, it's all 100% compliant with the original persons donating their bodies to feed the world. Now, the hamburgers are extraordinarily good tasting, some say the best in town. The price is also good - they have a great hook up for the main ingredient, after all.

By the same logic, would you say that people refusing to eat there have "a disconnect between their culinary tastes and their values?" Or, if people have a visceral reaction to some other fast food joints surreptitiously introducing the same magic ingredient in their diet, would you also tell them to _just eat it_ and _fucking enjoy it_?

The source matters, both for meat and art. It's part of the product itself, you cannot disentangle the taste and sound of the performance from the way it was produced. AI art trying to pass as human art is simply a form fraud, and some people will always reject it, while others are of course free to embrace it and enjoy it.

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#294

Post by bondarchuk »

topherhunt wrote: post #283
yoz-y wrote: post #243

Auto play has been a way for me to find new music. I stopped using it because now every listen is accompanied by a a nagging feeling that the song that is playing might be AI generated. Now I just go and look for new albums from bands I know I like. I wish there was a pre-2023 filter for the algorithmic feed.

I'm sorry but this attitude baffles me, and I think it's the sort of thing that will sound so silly in 20 years that we'll have collectively memory-holed it. If you're turned off from listening to Spotify recoms becausue they _might_ be AI and you _might_ not know, what does that say to you about the disconnect between your aesthetic judgment and your values? If you're listening to Spotify autoplays and a shitty song…

You can listen to AI-generated music all you want, why does it bother you so that others won't?

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#295

Post by sneak »

cornholio wrote: post #293
topherhunt wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry but this attitude baffles me, and I think it's the sort of thing that will sound so silly in 20 years that we'll have collectively memory-holed it. If you're turned off from listening to Spotify recoms becausue they _might_ be AI and you _might_ not know, what does that say to you about the disconnect between your aesthetic judgment and your values? If you're listening to Spotify autoplays and a shitty song…

Well, let's make a revoltingly fun analogy: say a hamburger restaurant opened in your city, that openly admits it puts (ethically acquired) human meat in some of its products. You don't have to worry about the legality of the venture, it's all 100% compliant with the original persons donating their bodies to feed the world. Now, the hamburgers are extraordinarily good tasting, some say the best in town. The price is…

> By the same logic, would you say that people refusing to eat there have "a disconnect between their culinary tastes and their values?"

Yes, obviously. It’s almost a perfect demonstration of that.

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#296

Post by latexr »

Rebuff5007 wrote: post #292
topherhunt wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry but this attitude baffles me, and I think it's the sort of thing that will sound so silly in 20 years that we'll have collectively memory-holed it. If you're turned off from listening to Spotify recoms becausue they _might_ be AI and you _might_ not know, what does that say to you about the disconnect between your aesthetic judgment and your values? If you're listening to Spotify autoplays and a shitty song…

I see your point, and think its valid, but here is a counter: Content is graded on both instant appeal (e.g. rotten tomatoes "popcornmeter") and artistic appeal (e.g. rotten tomatoes "tomatometer"). I firmly believe that AI generated content cannot have any artistic appeal, because I believe art is fundamentally an invocation of human expression. This might be fine in some contexts, but in general I'd prefer consumin…

> Content is graded on both instant appeal (e.g. rotten tomatoes "popcornmeter") and artistic appeal (e.g. rotten tomatoes "tomatometer").

I understand the distinction, but I don’t find the examples compelling. The difference between the popcorn and tomato meters, as I understand it, is just the source. The latter are critics’ opinions while the former are “regular people” opinions. Professional critics may have some concern for the artistic value of a movie, but their job is to help you decide “should you spend your time with this” and the entertainment value is a primary consideration. Furthermore, a critic can have early access and needs to write their review fast. An audience member, who has no such obligation, can let it ruminate and have their opinions evolve. In that sense, a critic’s opinion may be more influenced by initial appeal.

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#297

Post by aucisson_masque »

topherhunt wrote: post #283
yoz-y wrote: post #243

Auto play has been a way for me to find new music. I stopped using it because now every listen is accompanied by a a nagging feeling that the song that is playing might be AI generated. Now I just go and look for new albums from bands I know I like. I wish there was a pre-2023 filter for the algorithmic feed.

I'm sorry but this attitude baffles me, and I think it's the sort of thing that will sound so silly in 20 years that we'll have collectively memory-holed it. If you're turned off from listening to Spotify recoms becausue they _might_ be AI and you _might_ not know, what does that say to you about the disconnect between your aesthetic judgment and your values? If you're listening to Spotify autoplays and a shitty song…

>If AI slop is flooding Spotify with shitty songs, they'll naturally fail algorithmically

It implies to trust the algorithm and believe that Spotify developer, first know what they're doing, secondly have your best interest at heart.

I don't believe neither, I don't use their algorithm.

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#298

Post by williamdclt »

topherhunt wrote: post #283
yoz-y wrote: post #243

Auto play has been a way for me to find new music. I stopped using it because now every listen is accompanied by a a nagging feeling that the song that is playing might be AI generated. Now I just go and look for new albums from bands I know I like. I wish there was a pre-2023 filter for the algorithmic feed.

I'm sorry but this attitude baffles me, and I think it's the sort of thing that will sound so silly in 20 years that we'll have collectively memory-holed it. If you're turned off from listening to Spotify recoms becausue they _might_ be AI and you _might_ not know, what does that say to you about the disconnect between your aesthetic judgment and your values? If you're listening to Spotify autoplays and a shitty song…

While I think it's an opinion that's somewhat valid and I wouldn't really blame anyone for consuming art this way, it's definitely missing a lot of what art can be about.

A piece of art is not a self-contained thing, the end result isn't where all (or even most) of the interest resides. The intent of the artist, the point they're making, the history that led to it, the references it makes and why, the choices and decisions taken in making it... that's all inherent part of the art and a huge part of why people might enjoy a piece of art or not.

For example, if I listen to some progressive rock, I might enjoy it for how a fellow human managed to identify and break some rules of traditional songwriting, for their expertise in musical theory, for the references they chose to make to other bands/songs/genres... If I learn it's AI-generated, the song itself hasn't changed but there's no point in it anymore, my enjoyment was directly coming from the fact that it was made by a human: if it's a machine I'll just shrug and say "yeah sure everyone knows machines can do that". Entire genres like punk or grunge make zero sense if not human-made.

For a more extreme example: a piece of contemporary art often has very little point in itself. The art is in the artist's process (their point of view, intent, history, etc), not the piece. If a piece is AI-generated, there's literally zero interest in it (except maybe as commentary on AI itself, fine).

> what you do is you _listen to it_ and you _fucking enjoy it_. This knee-jerk disgust reaction of "ugh I worry that it's AI" has no place in your heart in that moment

I suggest being a lot more humble about your understanding of art and other people's relationship to it

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#299

Post by xerxes249 »

topherhunt wrote: post #283
yoz-y wrote: post #243

Auto play has been a way for me to find new music. I stopped using it because now every listen is accompanied by a a nagging feeling that the song that is playing might be AI generated. Now I just go and look for new albums from bands I know I like. I wish there was a pre-2023 filter for the algorithmic feed.

I'm sorry but this attitude baffles me, and I think it's the sort of thing that will sound so silly in 20 years that we'll have collectively memory-holed it. If you're turned off from listening to Spotify recoms becausue they _might_ be AI and you _might_ not know, what does that say to you about the disconnect between your aesthetic judgment and your values? If you're listening to Spotify autoplays and a shitty song…

The problem is that it is making Spotify money if they substitute real artists by generated music that they produced themselves. They will have to pay a smaller share of their money to actual artists.

Re: AI singer now occupies eleven spots on iTunes singles chart

#300

Post by piokoch »

Mainstream music was created for a good 20 years using the following process:

1. Do the survey/focus groups to figure out a hot topic for a song. For instance your exploration shows that 300K girls between 13 and 17 years old were left by their boyfriend, so there is a 300K market for a song about that.

2. Find someone or group who will sing the song. Something your target audience will identify. E.g. "rebellious teenager" (take Britney Spears), "we need a group that will attack larger target" - take Spice Girls - we take one black, one white, one Latino looking (doesn't have to be real Latino, obviously), one polite and nice, one impolite. You get the point.

3. Note: singer/group does not need to know how to sing, they need to move reasonably on the scene, the rest autotune and computers will handle easily.

So, given the process, AI singer is just a little bit different "music" production process, not so much different from the one used up to date except that you don't need autotune anymore.

Luckily there are still people who do music for the sake of doing music and it really stands out as compared to 80% of fodder for listeners that is on YT, radio, Spotify.

Post reply on HN