{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/31/2023 3:01:27 AM
12
AI represents a new frontier, and our instinct is to react to the unknown with fear.
I write music as a hobby, and a number of new AI programs are coming out that assist in composing, arranging and mastering music.
In short these programs are like collaborating with another person. They toss out raw musical ideas, but they still require a human sense of taste and emotional awareness in order to edit out the BAD ideas, and develop and properly use the good ones.
Like all good technologies, it augments human abilities (great treatment for creative blocks) but they are nowhere near capable of replacing those abilities.
IOW, AI generates music might be interesting to listen to—-as a curiosity—-but it’s not going to make you feel anything other than that. Except by sheer accident.
Like the old joke about giving 100 monkeys word processors, and letting them type. Given enough time and luck? They’ll eventually bang out the complete works of Shakespeare. But it won’t be art…or entertainment.
English
-
Music with lyrics generated by a AI does sound interesting to me. One of the things I’m afraid of is that it either is used for government activities or it becomes so close to human standards that we can’t tell the difference. It already tricked Bungie with the AOTW submission, but if it doesn’t go any farther in terms of use, then I’m fine with it
-
The problem isn’t the technology. It’s the human beings without a moral compass….
-
I’ll agree, however it can also be very damaging to the people who spend lots of time on those things, who now have to combat that optimization of a hard task. It does have great ability to aid people with talent, and I have used it to help visualize a concept. I think there just needs to be a way to keep the people who try to pass off AI work as their own.
-
I think it depends on how it’s used. …and I think we’ll have to redefine what is “original” work. Because as the technology improves you’re going to see more collaboration with it…and a democratization of creative work.
-
Yea…but the problem is that, not everyone wants to do make their art public domain. It takes a lot of work to do. But when someone uploads an art piece that they made or something of that manner, it’s added to the cache that the ai can draw from, and it produces very similar results, and that is art theft. Whether or not you mean to, you are using other peoples artwork without their permission. I also am confused when you say that we need to redefine original work, as well as a democratic system of creation. That’s just, not how it works. Art is self expression through a medium. Obviously no ideas are original. But the different with AI, is that their not ideas-it’s just using other peoples work. As I said before however, it does have the potential for good.
-
It’s only theft if it’s an exact copy. Otherwise it’s an “influence”…and human artists borrow ideas from one another all the time.
-
Not necessarily, art theft can take the form of an algorithm using an artist’s piece without their consent, the problem is that there’s no regulation for this. And even to your point, there are several instances of people producing near copies of a piece they made by putting in a prompt that describes it-and they don’t want it to do that-but that doesn’t matter cause they can’t stop it from using it. As well as the fact that there are instances of distorted signature appearing in AI image generation, once again showing the non confidential nature of the algorithm. AI doesn’t borrow ideas because it can’t, it uses pre-existing things to help it create the illusion of creation or thought which is why this happens.
-
People have tried to file suit like that in the music world, and they invariably lose. Because once you start picking apart art like that, almost nothing is actually original. Everyone is influenced by someone. As one judge aptly said, “You can’t copyright a chord progression.” The only parts of music that see some degree of copyright protection are melodies…and recordings (individual performances).
-
You’re still using examples that don’t work, you’re referencing a quote that functions under the assumption that someone put work into a similar sounding or looking piece of art or music, this does not apply since AI literally can not think and uses preexisting things to function and “create” something
-
I’m applying legal precedent. Now if the laws change, that’s one thing.
-
In any case, it doesn’t stop it from happening and their needs to be a way to protect your creations from use if you don’t want it to be used. I’m not excluding the possibility of other artists making similar things to one another, but as I said it’s still not using the piece itself. That is my final say on the matter
-
Then you’re going to find yourself in the same unfortunate position that the music recording industry found itself in a generation ago. Futilely trying to resist technology in a desperate bid to protect an obsolete business model. They have never recovered, and have been superseded by companies that have embraced digital delivery, and artists who have used the technology such that they can do their own recording, marketing and distribution. While other industries like movies, TV, and now gaming have embraced the technology. Adapted their business models to the new reality, and barely skipped a beat. Asking the whole world to change so that we don’t have to is a bad long term strategy. AI is coming..and nothing is going to stop it or limit its capabilities. You can either choose to surf the wave…or get washed away by it. Your decision.
