The person I replied to did, albeit indirectly.
She created value for the shareholders!
you switched from rage baiting to concern trolling? earlier, I’ve already DMed someone in the discussion to avoid your inane, vapid comments, but next time I’ll report you straight to mods.
not to mention you’re running the same tired “fair use” argument (which is broken down on the creative copyright internet in language accessible for every IQ tier), and the entire premise of commercial GPT products at the moment relies on copyright laws being rewritten to accomodate them;
apple already warns users they can’t exactly launch the iOs AI in Europe because EU legislation is independent from american one, and things open AI is trying to commercialize on are not allowed.
3 Likes
I mostly agree with where you’re coming from, however:
Money is already a major influence on music (and if it wasn’t then pleasing whatever institution was in charge giving artists their bread would be). If everyone had access to AI and it produced music that was pleasant to the listener then there wouldn’t be any money to be made with music (just with selling access to the AI).
If I’m going to wear the muzzle then you will too. However - in this thread I’ve been far more civil than you or @blossomingruin has. In other threads as well. Report me all you want for disagreeing with you. Please.
The fair use argument is an analogy that AI doesn’t do what humans can’t already do - it just does it quicker and without the skill cap. And ultimately that is what will determine if people want to make laws around it. People can make laws banning anything they want.
1 Like
excuse me?
for example, stealing - which in your book is totally fine, as long as it’s backed by investor funding.
everything else in your comment is low-effort rage bait - again - you are either not capable of constructing arguments or simply not bothering with doing so, but in the light of the plastic, botoxed in and out freak being called out by pro-ML reddit out of all places for her repeated psychopathy you look really amusing, pushing that inability to read the room with my and @ruin’s reactions to the subject straight to the forefront.
2 Likes
If the same effect was done by humans manually then it wouldn’t be considered stealing. The argument for it being theft is just very weak. I’m not in love with AI. I’ve said I’m indifferent. And I’ve also alluded to that it will have harmful social consequences - artists losing their jobs not even being the tip of the iceberg.
Disagreement is not rage-bait just because it makes you mad.
I’m very well aware that I’m unpopular here. lol
1 Like
people were taken to courts over stealing from others; Jingna Zhang I’ve posted about up the thread won her appeal earlier this year in a plagiarism lawsuit that had no connection to AI whatsoever.
meanwhile the state of AI gen in 2024 is this:
the advice for now would be to abstain from this wording when you’ve just slithered into this thread to police my language, petal.
2 Likes
Obvious cases of copyright infringement aside. I guess that needs to be said here.
Do you actually not understand the difference between disagreeing with someone and slinging insults?
Maybe I’m a retard for wasting my time asking.
mine wasn’t a personal insult to start with, and considering the amount of the most intellectually inane dribble I’m reading from the alternatively gifted AI-assisted creators (which I can choose not to read, but I do it to have an idea of what we’re dealing with as a result of big tech infantilizing a skilled trade) you personally are giving off very big “screaming at the mirror” vibes in case with my very mildly worded comment.
that, coupled with your own self-assessment, and with your inability to form a concise, easy to understand point, your misplaced use of terminology (no, petal, ripping off artwork without scoring permission is not “fair use”, and “fair use” you’ve picked up over on AI twitter/AI reddit has a very limited, very narrow, explicitly non-commercial attribution in the legal realm), I don’t get the purpose of you posting here so regularly. so aggressively, too.
the kind of attention landing in your @s is not of the positively affirming tier, to say the least.
1 Like
All my points are very concise. Maybe something else is the problem here.
Never been to either of them. You like to make assumptions and are dead wrong on the vast majority.
your ad hominems have been tired and lacking originality from the very start, but on this one you’re landing in my ignored people list. ciao.
1 Like
@zumbah and @nekkichi Now’s the time to cool down the arguing and stick to discussions and disagreements about AI in J-rock and visual kei specifically. You’ve both made your opinions on the subject clear, so please refrain from taking jabs at each other. Focus on the argument, not the person. Any further posts not related to this topic will be deleted.
4 Likes
But music is not only about “pleasant to the listener”. If it was just that there would be no stars and no concerts and no band shirts and no festivals, no music videos, no screaming fan girls, no Beatles, no Nirvana and no Billy Jean. Music is so much more than just listening to pleasant noises glued together. Especially vk lives from an artist prsenting the music.
Sure, some people just use music as background noise. And for these people AI music would probably be good enough. But all the people who go to concerts, do for the expierence of seeing the artist live.
I didn’t like music at all in my early teens. I dispised it and thought it was annoying even. And I probably still wouldn’t care if it was just “pleasent to listen to”.
5 Likes
Someone I know keeps saying that the AI rendering or what you call it in The Devil in Me is top notch stuff, like a masterpiece of AI. Is it that good?
I personally don’t like it that much. I would have preferred a traditionel mv.
I was probably a bit narrow in my wording there. Of course there are aspects of music that people enjoy outside of the sound (shared social identity, appreciation of talent, the things you listed, etc.). But if all of that is really that intrinsic to people’s enjoyment of music (I’m obviously agreeing generally) then that’s just even more reason why AI would never be able to replace musicians.
The rendering is quite good, it’s undeniable but the use of IA is so lazy especially for a creative band like DEG. I hope that they will return to more traditional approach in the future.
in other news,
“The use here is far from transformative, as there is no functional purpose for… [the] AI model to ingest the Copyrighted Recordings other than to spit out new, competing music files,” according to the complaints.
The complaints say Suno and Udio produce works like Prancing Queen that even devoted ABBA fans would struggle to distinguish from an authentic recording from the band.
“The motive is brazenly commercial and threatens to displace the genuine human artistry that is at the heart of copyright protection,” the record labels said in the lawsuits.
I’ve spent several days in the light of this thinking about all the industries where visual art staff is employed, and original - non-stock image, non public domain art is still an ongoing need, and how none of them have done anything to bar midjourney from scraping content from non-consenting artists, and I could not think of any of them. we really are at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to unionizing, protecting, organizing - there’re individual artists who sued, but their corporate employers pretend to act like nothing has happened.
3 Likes
More is releasing a song for their 9th anniversary and I was stoked and then I saw the YouTube video. Bummer.
1 Like