"No hay nada mรก i inmune que el que todo lo perdiรณ"
"There is nothing more immune than he who has lost everything."
Any conversation
Man, I LOVE naps! In fact, I mostly subsist on four or five 1-1/2 hour naps each day instead of one long over-night sleep period these days. I didn't set out to have a sleep schedule, but here I am. :-)
Today I wanted to share some Music from my youth :)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hn-pNxtByM
I think yes, but precisely NOT "at a philosophical level". You can have it only if you get your hands dirty and build it yourself. I think @stagasprofilefollow
creative technologist
creator of textlog already proved this, just as a close example.
creative technologist
creator of textlog already proved this, just as a close example.
Vagyis attรณl mรฉg, hogy trehรกny vagyok, mรฉg mลฑkรถdhetne jobban is az anyagmegmaradรกs tรถrvรฉnye, mint รฉppen errefelรฉ, vagyis errefelรฉ plรกne mลฑkรถdnie kellene, mรฉgsem ezt teszi.
So even though I'm clumsy, the law of conservation of matter could still work better than it does here, or rather, it shouldn't work here, but it doesn't.
bill gates built microsoft by making computation cheaper faster and harder for government to restrain. now that he's a billionaire no longer dependent on the free market for his own success he's discovered the virtues of taxing the next wave of computation. 1995 gates would have called it a tax on innovation. classic pull-the-ladder-up-behind-you politics.
(Opinion) People donโt like generative AI because it made the {insert creativity} too easy. Saw the HN post on โAI music banned from top 40 chart in Australiaโ and people had very strong opinions in both directions.
The hot take: If youโre ok with someoneโs creativity being outsourced to others, then you should be ok with AI doing the same.
If โAI made this and I call it mineโ is bad but โsomeone overseas on fivver made this and I call it mineโ and itโs suddenly ok, time to self reflect.
โฆ
My hot take: from the moment you use technology, be it an instrument, a synthesizer, a DAW, and now AI, it is still your idea, your effort, your time spent, and that makes it yours. Others can do the same if they choose. The same way someone chooses a classic guitar over a synthesizer, one can choose an AI over (insert ancient way of doing things).
โฆ
Youโre rolling the dice whenever you are searching for a sample or a preset in a synthesizer. Eventually itโs what โsounds goodโ, so still the effort is your judgement and the time spent finding that โdice rollโ that sounded well.
I am not a musician, so I lack the jargon to properly explain what I mean.
I used AI for creative writing (nothing too fancy, TTRPG). There, the broader the dice roll, the more generic and uninteresting the results. Slop, if you will. It was surprisingly good to build up on ideas I had however.
I imagine muisic also has building blocks. Melodies, instruments, mixing, etc. AI can perhaps be used in a similar fashion there.
I heard a perspective I sort of like: if AI is a tool then acceptable AI use is, more or less, defined as "when my audience no longer notices or cares". It's dynamic like that. Bad photoshop is detectable and annoying, so are overusing presets. Your artistry needs to expand to meet the tool.
I don't know if I 100% like that or agree. At the same time, it's a pretty straightforward line, a practical take.