I still don’t understand what the issue is according to your view. What kind a accessibility would be necessary in your view? And what kind of kind of AI are you talking about where this doesn’t exist today or where it is at risk?
do I have to repeat myself?
I havent even framed the “issue” of “AI” and I was clear that for me its a “non issue”. And I think I specified multiple times that I dont see the issue, and I think its a distraction to mount this pretentious sense of drama about Artist vs AI, and I dont think its even relevant.
All I think is that if you want to take an issue with AI, the correct way (in my opinion) is to find out how our “social managers” like google, fecesbook, the owners of massive AIs, how they use them, and argue “why should they have it and I should not?”…
now obvious answer would be " because I dont have money and AI is expensive"… but in pure theory, why should I not use AI? Why should I not have this tool and they can? Why google yes me not? Why the journalist is allowed and I am not?
because what it seems to me, is that many people argue against me using AI, but I have seen nobody, literally nobody saying that journalists should also not use it, or google should also not use it, or apple or whatever. I think we have to retain this right even in abstract terms, even if you dont end up using it, even if you choose to not use it… you still have to retain your abstract right.
What kind of AI are you talking about? Are you referring to their recommender AIs?
I don’t know which AI solution you are referring to, because I am not aware of a solution that was made available to journalists only.
1 Like
theres blender system that is asking me to start a private discussion with you and I already feel like we are talking between me and you in a loop spiral of “lets clarify this minute detail please Im just trying to understand”
and then I have to answer, to stuff that is reinterpreted on the fly. So keep in mind this is the last message I will give you in answer. the next question you have will have to be directed at me in my messages. And I will answer you, maybe, but not today for sure.
Ok heres my answer: There are many “AIs”… I do not know every usage of “AIs” and this is also a marketing term that is now trending so you may also see normal softwares being labeled as “AI”…
You will also see companies eager to get “AI” and they can also get scammed.
And I am generically referring to common parlance sense of “AI”, without having to be extremely hyperspecific, its the “AI” that basically you talked about till now without having any need to have a minute detail and painful description of what it is to satisfy a sadistic and sinister curiosity, you asked no clarification of terms till now. Refer to wikipedia for more info.
As for journos using AI, yes they do.
I am asking questions, because I don’t understand what you are talking about. And not addressing those questions usually doesn’t help me to get a better understanding.
I don’t know whether you are talking about products that are using AI that should be made available to the masses. Or if the technology or techniques are being kept from the public.
You do have an “abstract” right to use an AI. There’s even plenty of available research for you to get started working on your own solution. But since it’s abstract, as opposed to being guaranteed by law, no one is obligated to share their hard and expensive work with the masses.
1 Like
yes thanks i agree. plus, no company wants to give me their info, hence why its always a good idea to “reverse engineer” if you know what I mean…
Not really.
I don’t understand your position here at all: in one place you state that some “social managers” use it “against us” (talks about drama), and in another - you say that you don’t see an issue with AI usage 
There was a point to @anon98372585’s clarifying questions, because it’s all got very, uh, abstract.
1 Like
because online theres this fake drama about AI, that should have happened maybe 20 years ago, when people were using other tools lik autotune and so on… nowadays its so pointless to even care about it…
There are rock stars that pitch correct each note, there are singers that use only autotunes, people that use daz or character creator, people who use tablets to draw, all the arguments in this fake debate “artist vs ai” are so fake and theyre all the exact same clone of the “issue” generated by tablet art where older artists complained about the caricature of “art” created digitally.
The world evolves, and we are reaching new heights of ridiculous, complaining about the weakest of the AI tools, one that barely creates some images of writes some code, when in reality AI is much more advanced… maybe you will joke about it with your circlejerk friends and you will ask me “clarification questions”, the reality will not change not even slightly… because we are only given the weakest AIs to toy with, and google and apple, amazon and so on, they have much much more powerful tools… again feel free to ridicule me or “ask nebulous questions” but I think I am not totally wrong…
I think this is all a distraction to somehow convince us that we have to care about artist vs AI, a topic so shallow and useless, its a total sad distraction.
It’s a conspiracy theory. No wonder you couldn’t answer my questions.
If those companies had way more advanced technologies, it would take new developers years to pick them up and getting used to them. I wonder why that is not the case.
2 Likes
Conspiracy theories are not allowed on this forum. Please provide a source for this argument.
I know that you nebulous “clarfication” would have led to this, so I thank you for coming out so boldly.
I mean, it wasnt needed a genius to notice the malice of the extreme and boring “hey clarify this and that” attitude you were assuming… it was evident you were trying to lead to this, to you who claim “muh conspiracy”…
In any case, I made my point. It is clear, despite you play around trying to claim its not clear.
let us repeat: AI vs artist is a scam topic and its completely illegitimate. There is no reason feel “victim” and no reason to create a sense of drama, because the supposed “artists” that complain about AI have absolutely no right to do so. And if you based your sense of drama on humanitarian argumentation and emotions, you are wrong, theres no need not to be cynical about it. Theres no reason not to favor AI over the supposed “artist”…
We need to be cynical here. And thats about all.
We have no right to complain, but you have a right to go to the moon? That makes sense.
Anyway, this conversation is taking a turn that is not allowed: conspiracy theories, insults, and personal attacks are showing up in full force, and all of that needs to stop immediately. If you can’t make your points without talking about “scams” and “malice”, without resorting to personal attacks and insults, and without using conspiracy theories, don’t make them.
I provide nothing. this is not my argument. It was extorted through a fraudolent amount of “clarifications” and I should have never answered to such blatant trolling.
…and this has not improved the musical landscape.
the point. there are people that “cheat” (do not ask me to clarify I put quotation marks I will not answer nebulous stuff ever again) so they use softwares that fake their skills (i take the liberty to use an informal language, do not ask me to clarify what I mean by “fake”, I will not clarify).
I could do a list longer than the bible, people who use autotune, and they feel its “legit”, they even argue it takes “skills”… and the point is that we see a repetition of what was happening in the beginning of the 2000s, where older artists complained about the supposed “lack of talent” of digital supposed “artists”…
Basically the argument was identical, it was claimed that digital artists lacked personality (i totally agree) dont have any creative skills (I disagree), but overall it was identical…
and we are repeating it, with AI and not with tablets. its still the same old distraction.
Humanitarian argumentation might be the most important one actually. And it doesn’t even goes against cynicism. What is left of us if we delegate ART of all things to AI?
Old sci-fi writers would’ve been horrified by the prospects.
You can’t seriously compare AI to autotune? That’s so NOT how it works, and that is the core of the problem. We’re NOT facing the same issue as in previous cases.
Sure, it can be used as an enhancement tool, but in the wrong hands, it also can be used independently from an artist AND cost an actual artist a workplace. AND lower average quality of art and life.
Progress marches on again, sure. But what did we get out of it, when we stopped asking pointed questions about the usage of the new tools? Bread that tastes like paper, and shoes that can fall apart in less than a year. And we call it normal. We got used to it.
2 Likes
1 Like
oh well refer to the situation of the older artists replaced by “soulless” tablet users then, because we have to learn how to adapt, they may have some good ideas we could learn from since we could all end up in their situation very soon.
I placed quotation mark on the word “soulless” because obvioulsy it was the term they used back in the days, I do not necessarily agree, so refrain from doing needless questions and claim “muh conspiracy”. I dont use any conspiracy, this happened for real, people were replaced by tablet users out of the nowhere.
Its happening again, we could even learn something if we pay attention
Initially, I though you meant that technologies such as GPT-4 had to be made available to everyone, but it didn’t make complete sense, so I asked, instead of assuming.
Later I got the impression, that you may think companies which controlled social media platforms, such as Google (especially with YouTube), Facebook, … had to be more open to share how their recommendations work.
It may also have been you were asking for more democratization of AI, that’s why I asked that as well.
Then, I got more and more confused.
My intention from the very beginning was to understand what you meant, because I am quite often interested to learn what people think (If you check out my posting history, you can figure that out as well). Because to me, the basis of having a discussion is to understand what the other person actually means.
With what I have learned now, I finally understand what you meant in your very first post:
1 Like