The Markov Chains is my favorite band, the last my seeing them live they played a fucking great index set.

 

AI: trained on all the music that was before
Musician: trained on all the music that was before

If the existence of AI ruined your life as a musician, you were a shitty musician. You have should changed your hobby (or profession) long ago. AI is nothing other than even more mediocre musicians. Doesn't matter.

 

Ever seen pictures of guitarists or guitars made by Picasso?

 

AI is not inherently creative, but it excels at finding information easily, elegantly, and with incredible speed from an incomprehensibly large database that is steadily approaching encompassing the entirety of human knowledge. With this capability, we can access any piece of human knowledge or discovery anywhere and anytime, rescuing it from potential oblivion, perhaps even eternal. Moreover, AI is capable of generating myriad combinations among billions of data points in an instant creating the universe of possibilities. While it may not possess human-like intelligence, its power is undeniable.
Should we worry? Older generations are living proof that younger generations can survive their lunacy (Schopenhauer).

 

Serious question, but a bit off topic, how do you find the strength to continue living? If you don't really have friends or a partner, your family doesn't care that much either, then why continue?

Is there actually any reason to continue at all? Maybe I'm too young and just don't get it, but I don't understand "joy" or whatever people are supposed to feel.

I wish I was a "robot" instead of a human (I know it sounds corny), at least I wouldn't have to feel anything.

 

Stop. Please just stop right here.

Yes, neural network models can be trained with incredible amounts of data, and processed at instant via modern inferencing methods. That's a given these days.

But... ask yourself where does the data on which the models are built come from? And seeing they're not inherently learning or creative, how do you synthesise outputs from faulty data? The sheer amount of data allows for no error checking whatsoever and the model has no understanding what it is actually processing. Let's say you're building a machine that does X, so you push out a plan for that but the model has no idea of how physics or engineering works. Only if the problem domain and the search space is small enough we can use something to create anything meaningful. And it still needs to be hand-checked, twice. I've seen what Copilot et al. can do to code. Good for simple translation jobs, often handy for generating autocompletes and syntax checking.

But encoding business logic or mathematics... yeah, once every blue moon.

Not to mention that the big players are simply running out of training data and producing AI generated source material for the next generation of models. Not to mention a lot of the stuff is trained out of user-generated content, which has it's own reliability problems, to put it mildly.

Google, which probably is the closest organization that could be said to amass all human knowledge, is already up shit creek with AI generated garbage stuffing it's search results.

 

Nice question @4096
But the answer would be PM, because ANY serious and deep discussion always end in the famous "political content" censorship.

 

ai he don't understand fingers at all....

 

the problem in comparing eras, or technology breakthroughs in different eras is the rate of replacation has increased massively. The photograph took 80 years to become a commercial success and for the price of the tech and the reliablity to reach a point where it could be embraced by the masses. Literally time for all involved to absorb and react to the technology.

to find a niche within, to embrace and use the technology and maintain a career.

The onset of digital photography took at most 50 years, and by the time it was birthed commercially, it was widespread in its uptake and almost immediately decimated film photography, allowing virtually no time to react and plan.

THe internets, globalization, and mass communication and transportation guarantees, most new tech arrives like a virus delivering pestilence among the whole population, no time to react, no time to immunize sectors of the economy, just another onslaught weakening the economies and social orders.

Most can weather a single storm, but when there is no time to repair and plan, an onslaught of continous storms will decimate even the most prepared.

few are prepared, and fewer still understand the situations they are in. but if its not on TV it doesn't exist so, few will care or even attempt to know.

Certainly anyone that cares to look up from their phone can see the social decay and the general uncivility of the common populace, these are symptoms, the disease is entrenched.

 

AI loves fingers

 

but Picasso was intentional in his depiction, not trying to be 'realistic'. plus his guitars sucked and would never stay in tune.
never ride on one of his airplanes... just a bit of advice for the weary travellers out there..

 

Production in the '80s was definitely out of reach for mere mortals, but the '90s were absolute gold for breaking into the studio scene. In the late 80's the employees at the local keyboard store still wore suits and ties and showed off a DX7IIFD like it was on loan from NASA lol
But then everything changed, 1989/90 young... stupid and motivated... the best time of all possible decades on earth. Gear for peanuts and rave revolution in full swing -- that will never happen again.

 

Don't bother with his Citroën

 

the thing with ai generative music is more so the ethics of scraping data rather then ai music being bad. like with ai visual art, theres not much stopping you from creating something in the style of an existing artist and selling it, or corporations firing their artists and just relying on the algorithm. dont think i need to explain why thatd be scummy.

(and besides, the "ai" in question isnt even the same sort of technology across all the tools op mentioned. analyzing audio to see how to edit it is a COMPLETELY different process then generating output based on whats most likely to be there)

 

i do find strength in a few things, making music being one of them

 

Last edited: Apr 18, 2024

The more machines involved into creating art the less life remains. AI products may look great - or sound great - but they are dead. That's not art. That's bullshit.

 

People SHOULD have a meltdown over anything AI-related. It will be the doom of humanity and will eventually enslave us, if we don't stop it. I wish I was joking.

Once AI starts to live inside peoples heads on a large scale via brain-computer-interfaces, (which are already successfully being trialed on humans as we speak) it will be over. Once BCIs become affordable, tech companies like Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc. will try their hardest to make it "cool" and market it as the evolution of the Smartphone.

Imagine a future where AI took away our freedom of thought, creativity, originality and made us part of an interconnected hivemind, where free will is an illusion and you're nothing but a cog in a giant machine. That's where we're headed.

 

Last edited: Apr 18, 2024

People always succumb to the comfort at first.

That's why people (and especially my generation) have no problem with leaving a big chunk of their personal data online. I think everyone could benefit from digital hygiene, but it is indeed a bit less comfortable to adapt to.

Humans will trade everything just to do a little less and corporations will do everything to earn more. And even if there were no corporations (let's imagine that hypothetical), people in the government (usually the psychopathic types) would do everything possible to consolidate power and money for themselves.

It almost feels like, that in a sense, humans are a self-destructive species. Perhaps I'm wrong, hopefully.

Sorry for my little ramblings.

 

I don't think I could exist without being able to make music. It's almost as essential as air (sorry for the extra dramaticism).