Robots

[PhillipOrdonez]

It will never have taste, Quarmat. Even taking about it as if it was possible is giving these scammers an undeserved prestige. Of course it never will simply because it is just algorithms and there's no intelligence in algorithms and never will be.

[selig]

It will never have taste, Quarmat. Even taking about it as if it was possible is giving these scammers an undeserved prestige. Of course it never will simply because it is just algorithms and there's no intelligence in algorithms and never will be.

Wait - are you equating intelligence with taste? I would have to disagree based on how many not so intelligent folks I know that are super creative. But I don’t see “taste” and “creative” as at all the same, so maybe it’s semantics or maybe just a different point of view?

I know folks who have excellent musical taste and couldn’t create a lick of music themselves, is what I’m trying to say here.

EDIT: maybe what your implying is AI can’t have FEELINGS? But I would suggest it could still stumble upon a situation where it may create something that makes us feel. It would be coincidental if it did, since AI can’t feel. BUT, it is still POSSIBLE for it to make “music” even if it’s not at all probable or consistent. Even the best creators don’t create “gold” every time they create…and even a broken clock is right twice a day (unless it’s a 24 hour clock).

[PhillipOrdonez]

They are not the same things but taste and creativity and feelings require intelligence to begin with. Like you have noticed, you can be very intelligent and not be creative and vice versa. That does not mean that the not very intelligent has no intelligence. They may appear not to when compared to you, but they have AN intelligence. Makes sense?

An algorithm doesn't, not even a little.

[mcatalao]

As far as i've heard, AI can only regurgitate music it has trained on

Same as me, FWIW!

Yeah, and until now I've only heard crap. Maybe AI's public is AI?

[bxbrkrz]

It can only create what was. Once upon a time. Last year's chart. Can AI create what will be trending in music and fashion? AI needs a fresh input of "Florida man put his head in an alligator's mouth for fun, and dies" variables, and all the other chaos we generate. Otherwise the output will look like Havana Cuba. A frozen in time cuteness.

[selig]

They are not the same things but taste and creativity and feelings require intelligence to begin with. Like you have noticed, you can be very intelligent and not be creative and vice versa. That does not mean that the not very intelligent has no intelligence. They may appear not to when compared to you, but they have AN intelligence. Makes sense?

An algorithm doesn't, not even a little.

I agree every being has intelligence, it's the matter of "degrees" that separates us, from a single cell amoeba to the most intelligent creature. And all the experts I've read don't claim AI has "intelligence" yet, but I also don't hear most folks suggesting it never will.

Again, we're talking crude first generation "algorithms", and in 1000 years from now (assuming we are still around) it will certainly not be crude algorithms if it's even algorithms at all.
So I totally agree that TODAY, AI can't make music that is very listenable. But who can say about tomorrow?
As for algorithms having intelligence, they don't but I can already program my Eurorack (or Reaktor software) to generate very listenable ambient music that I like to listen to as I write. It's just an algorithm too, and an even cruder one at that. But it does the job I ask!

[PhillipOrdonez]

Big jump going from listenable ambient music to, like op stated, charts and radio and whatever their imaginary of good music may be ‍♂️

It doesn’t have intelligence, but people who talk about it do so as if it did. But they named it “ai” when it is not and probably never will be an intelligence of any kind. I think for that you have to be alive and I don’t see algorithms ever becoming alive.

[FGL]

As far as i've heard, AI can only regurgitate music it has trained on

Just as we do and have always done as humans. We have imitated the sounds of nature, built instruments to approximate those sounds (failing miserably) but with these imperfect instruments we have created novel sounds that we have fallen in love with. Schools and traditions were formed, each with its own instruments and its own canons, in which essentially the same corpus was repeated and replayed with minimal variations. Then separate traditions came together, some disappeared forever, others became so majority that they appeared to be the only "right" ones, but it was always a remixing of existing stuff, making admixtures, contaminations, mash-ups. Everything AI already does with the stuff we've produced. Obviously, by design, AI tries to be in the Gaussian ridge, so it comes up with stuff that quantitatively looks more "appreciable," but it is perfectly at the occorence of even the most extreme and niche bangs of human music production, if those are online.

The only difference is that AI does not catch happy accidents without a human pointing them out. To it, one track is as good as the next. Without human taste, AI is nothing but the summation of everything, with no hierarchy, no history with no criteria other than the "sense" that the concentration of data gives.

AI has no taste -- for now.

I'm not so sure about "taste" as far as those around me are concerned. When it comes to music and food, what people call their taste is usually pack behavior and social pressure. I actually also deny that the taste in an English McDonald's arose out of free will.

And big breasts, naked dancing and gutter language or the glorification of drugs, which make up a large part of popular culture, are not listed under the term "taste" for me either.

[FGL]

Same as me, FWIW!

Yeah, and until now I've only heard crap. Maybe AI's public is AI?

As always, we do not see the real thing. We only see some YouTube Clickbait.

[FGL]

Technology is cheating. Only cavemen still made real music. This note trick was already too much. All Roman and Sumerian music was robbed of its rights by technology.

[FGL]

Check out Moravec's paradox: The hard things are easy, the easy things are hard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox

I remember being fascinated by this concept years ago, that the things we thought would be difficult (robots/computers playing chess) ended up being fairly easy, while the basic concepts like lifting a glass to our lips is still difficult for robots.

Once again I wasn't the first

[selig]

Big jump going from listenable ambient music to, like op stated, charts and radio and whatever their imaginary of good music may be ‍♂️

It doesn’t have intelligence, but people who talk about it do so as if it did. But they named it “ai” when it is not and probably never will be an intelligence of any kind. I think for that you have to be alive and I don’t see algorithms ever becoming alive.

Big jump indeed, but damn have you looked at that computer in your pocket? If it was 1970 and someone said it would be a big jump to put current computing power into a hand held device, they would also be correct. But it happened in my lifetime, which is a tiny tiny slice of all of human experience. And most of us are using computers to make music, something I never would have guessed when I was a teenager in the 1970s.

I'm guessing your "beef" is with the folks who over hype AI and call it "intelligence"? I don't give a crap about what those folks are saying, I'm more interested in where the technology is going based on reality. There will always be the "hype" folks, just ignore them.

But I have to admit that "dumb" algorithms already make "music" I can enjoy listening to, maybe just not what someone else would call "music".

[PhillipOrdonez]

Life is a bit of a barrier. Computers doing great advances in a few decades doesn’t mean much when we are talking about creating life from where life was not before. That’s in my mind several orders of magnitude from playing videos and making calls and MIDI with a handheld device that took a room of computing to achieve 50 years ago…. Most tech sucks, haven’t you noticed? Is just time wasting for the most part, nothing actually revolutionary comes to mind when thinking of tech especially lately… things have plateaued… it’s just a repackaging of either ways to steal your info to sell and or repackaging of the same old in a different casing ‍♂️

[DaveyG]

An AI generated song could easily hit the big time. Most songs need a healthy dose of good luck to make it big. Obviously some have a better chance than others by being heavily promoted or being connected with a big TV series or movie but many other just happen to go viral for no particular reason.

So, imagine what would happen if AI started writing and producing songs and also marketing them on social media, promoting them in all the traditional ways and also hawking them around TV and film circles. It could even make a feature of the "fakeness". Almost all of these attempts would fail but one or two would not and we'd all be humming them, even if we hated the idea.

I think we ain't seen n-n-n-nothin' yet.

[FGL]

An AI generated song could easily hit the big time. Most songs need a healthy dose of good luck to make it big. Obviously some have a better chance than others by being heavily promoted or being connected with a big TV series or movie but many other just happen to go viral for no particular reason.

So, imagine what would happen if AI started writing and producing songs and also marketing them on social media, promoting them in all the traditional ways and also hawking them around TV and film circles. It could even make a feature of the "fakeness". Almost all of these attempts would fail but one or two would not and we'd all be humming them, even if we hated the idea.

I think we ain't seen n-n-n-nothin' yet.

Yes, it's all about airplay. Often terribly embarrassing music stuck in my head.

[selig]

Life is a bit of a barrier. Computers doing great advances in a few decades doesn’t mean much when we are talking about creating life from where life was not before. That’s in my mind several orders of magnitude from playing videos and making calls and MIDI with a handheld device that took a room of computing to achieve 50 years ago…. Most tech sucks, haven’t you noticed? Is just time wasting for the most part, nothing actually revolutionary comes to mind when thinking of tech especially lately… things have plateaued… it’s just a repackaging of either ways to steal your info to sell and or repackaging of the same old in a different casing ‍♂️

I'm continually intrigued how two people can experience the same thing and yet see two totally different views of it.
Viva la difference, it's 100% a good thing IMO!

[aeox]

As far as i've heard, AI can only regurgitate music it has trained on

Just as we do and have always done as humans. We have imitated the sounds of nature, built instruments to approximate those sounds (failing miserably) but with these imperfect instruments we have created novel sounds that we have fallen in love with. Schools and traditions were formed, each with its own instruments and its own canons, in which essentially the same corpus was repeated and replayed with minimal variations. Then separate traditions came together, some disappeared forever, others became so majority that they appeared to be the only "right" ones, but it was always a remixing of existing stuff, making admixtures, contaminations, mash-ups. Everything AI already does with the stuff we've produced. Obviously, by design, AI tries to be in the Gaussian ridge, so it comes up with stuff that quantitatively looks more "appreciable," but it is perfectly at the occorence of even the most extreme and niche bangs of human music production, if those are online.

The only difference is that AI does not catch happy accidents without a human pointing them out. To it, one track is as good as the next. Without human taste, AI is nothing but the summation of everything, with no hierarchy, no history with no criteria other than the "sense" that the concentration of data gives.

AI has no taste -- for now.

Great point!

Ai lacks nuance more than anything. it's like a painter painting a tree on canvas... it's can try but it will never be the real thing(it's a joke). (i hope i'm proven wrong in the next 10 years)