421–430 of 511 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The reason so much writing, podcasting, and music is vulnerable to AI disruption is that quality has already become secondary. Commercial creative workers are vulnerable because there's a billions-of-dollars industry effort to copy their professional output and compete with them selling cheap knock-offs. I see this sort of convenient resignation all the time in the tech crowd... "creative workers only can blame the…
> Commercial creative workers are vulnerable because there's a billions-of-dollars industry effort to copy their professional output and compete with them selling cheap knock-offs. I agree there will be winners and losers of some proportion here. But I also think the people that want to pay for art will continue to pay as their motives and values are different. There's plenty of cheap knock-off art, but people still…
I think I agree with your larger point, but is this part true? When Spotify provided a much simpler UX to get the goods, people were happy to pay $10/month and Napster et al basically died.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you never in your life enjoyed a pirated movie, game, book or music track?
Sure, and it wasn't the right thing to do, especially if it was from an independent artist. I haven't in well over a decade. There's also a canyon of a difference between that, and if I had re-sold their product, at scale, effectively putting the artists out of business. I'd love to explode copyright, but unfortunately, our society has no mechanism for compensating the people that make this valuable work without it,…
There is a direct line between music piracy you did in the past and the status quo of Spotify paying millidollars to artists today. Another POV is, find me musicians who prefer a world with Internet piracy compared to one without.
EDIT: to be clear, what I'm really asking is what does this tech demo extend to--what might we imagine actually using this technology for? Or is that not the point?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The reason so much writing, podcasting, and music is vulnerable to AI disruption is that quality has already become secondary. Commercial creative workers are vulnerable because there's a billions-of-dollars industry effort to copy their professional output and compete with them selling cheap knock-offs. I see this sort of convenient resignation all the time in the tech crowd... "creative workers only can blame the…
> Tech folks love sentiments like this because it entirely emotionally places the onus on the people getting ripped off by big tech companies for being ripped off. This, times a million. Add to that the ancient quote from Plato(?) criticizing writing or the other ancient quote complaining about the irresponsibility of the youth, unthinkingly deployed to attempt to delegitimize any kind of critique of nearly anything.…
Nobody is getting "ripped off" by ML models any more than by other humans. When a human wants to launch a high-quality podcast, they survey the market, listen to a lot of other high quality podcasts, and then set to creating their own derivative work.
What ML models are doing is really no different. It's just much, much faster.
Everything humans create is derivative of other works. Speed is the only difference.
NotebookLM's is incredibly good at generating the affect and structure of a quality podcast. This is in-line with all art, music, and video created by LMM at the moment. They are imitating a structure and affect, the quality of the content is largely irrelevant. I think the interesting thing is that most people don't really care, and AI is not to blame for that. Most books published today have the affect of a book, b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO it seems almost epistemologically impossible that LLM's following anything even resembling the current techniques will ever be able to comfortably out-perform humans at genuinely creative endeavours because they, almost by definition, cannot be "exceptional". If you think about how an LLM works, it's effectively going "given a certain input, what is the statistically average output that I should provide, given my…
I’m not sure. The bestsellers lists are full of average-or-slightly-above-average wordsmiths with a good idea, the time and stamina to write a novel and risk it failing, someone who was willing to take a chance on them, and a bit of luck. The majority of human creative output is not exceptional. A decent LLM can just keep going. Time and stamina are effectively unlimited, and an LLM can just keep rolling its 100 dice…
What's that saying? "Nobody ever went broke overestimating the poor taste of the average person"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
... and it still won't be music. The reason why people like music is because another person wrote and performed it. We like watching other people. Give us an infinite playlist of elevator music and it just becomes oatmeal.
This is just a "no true Scotsman" take. Popular music has already been synthetic and souless for decades now. People will listen to what sounds good to them, and we already know the bar is very low, and that the hard truth is that it is all subjective anyway.
We’ve had software accompaniment for a long time. Elevator music. The same 4 chords arranged in similar ways for decades. Hasn’t destroyed music. Neither will AI.
At some point people are going to want to know who’s on the other side making the music.
Unless your argument is that nobody values artists… which is I guess one of the primary conceits of GenAI enthusiasts today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think and hope that you're wrong. There's always been cheese, and there's a lot of it now. But there is still a market for top-notch insight. For example, Perun. This guy delivers an hourlong presentation on (mostly) the Ukraine-Russia war and its pure quality. Insights, humour, excellent delivery, from what seems to be a military-focused economist/analyst/consultant. We're a while away from some bot taking this ki…
I keep seeing this asertion: "the robots will get there" (or its ilk), and it's starting to feel really weird to me. It's an article of faith -- we don't KNOW that they're going to get there. They're going to get better, almost certainly, but how much? How much gas is left in the tank for this technique? Honestly, I think the fact that every new "groundbreaking" news release about LLMs has come alongside a swath of d…
- "Given this thing I saw a computer program do, clearly we'll have intelligent AI real soon now."
- "If we generate sufficiently smart AI then clearly all the jobs will go away because the AI will just do them all for us"
- "We'll clearly be able to do the AI thing using a reasonable amount of electricity"
None of these ideas are "clear", and they're all based on some "futurist faith" crap. Let's say Microsoft does succeed (likely at collosal cost in compute) in creating some humanlike AI. How will they put it to work? What incentives could you offer such a creature? What will it want in exchange for labor? What will it enjoy? What will it dislike? But we're not there yet, first show me the intelligent AI then we can discuss the rest.
What's really disturbing about this is hype is precisely that this technology is so computationally intensive. So of course the computer people are going to hype it--they're pick and shovel salespeople supplying (yet another) gold rush.
I just gave it straight up erotica from an old Usenet post. The results are hilarious. I also tried the Flyting of Dunbar and Kennedy. It was actually well done. https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/1d13e76e-eb4b-48ef-89... Also just uploading msdos 1.25 asm https://github.com/microsoft/MS-DOS/tree/main/v1.25/source It was way better than I though I think the best is the self referential. This actual comment thread…
I was surprised that NotebookLM not only allows erotica (for now), the AI hosts approached the topic appropriately and didn't shy away from it, while remaining professional.
It's not like it'll bleed over into other documents and our AI hosts will start acting out a slash fiction story in the middle of summarizing a quarterly report.