Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

"Generative AI is the greatest risk to the human creative class that has ever existed"

Alchemedia

Alchemedia

Decomposer
“The law should never be such that human creators stand to gain more from repeatedly clicking a button to generate massive amounts of AI-produced materials than from putting their hearts, souls, experiences, skills, talents, and emotions into expressive works of art.”

www.musicbusinessworldwide.com

NMPA: Generative AI is ‘the greatest risk to the human creative class that has ever existed’ - Music Business Worldwide

The National Music Publishers Association says it’s members are “not opposed” to AI, but it has some suggestions on how it should be governed.
www.musicbusinessworldwide.com www.musicbusinessworldwide.com
Click to read more...
 
What is happening is an industrialization of the creative process. What used to be a piece of art, produced one at a time, is now being generated by machines by the truckload.

I think we all know the difference between generic, formulaic music and music with depth and complexity. I think AI will excel at the former, not sure about the latter. But I find myself continuing to be surprised at what AI is doing with image generation. It’s very impressive.

Not allowing AI generated content to be copyrighted sounds like a good idea. That seems straightforward. But I’m not sure how you can force someone or something to acquire a license if they are going to learn or be trained by a piece of music. That is a more challenging suggestion to implement.
 
Alchemedia said:
“The law should never be such that human creators stand to gain more from repeatedly clicking a button to generate massive amounts of AI-produced materials than from putting their hearts, souls, experiences, skills, talents, and emotions into expressive works of art.”
Click to expand...
I think this gets to the core of the problem, that many miss (as does the actual complaint).

It's not a fear of AI taking away creativity, or the humanity of art - it's a fear that it takes away the economy and there is less money in 'art'.

Many industries have become commodotised over the years, and music/art is now hitting that more than ever - there are alread sweat-shops around the world that can churn out 'average' artwork, and every day people buy cards, see pictures and hear music that are not 'art' by the article standard... AI will just beat them all in the rush to the bottom.

Society is in many ways very simple - some humans like to express themselves and some humans are willing to barter money (or whatever) for that art. AI does not change that, but it massively disrupts the capitalist economy and those who see art as a 'business' rather than simply:
putting their hearts, souls, experiences, skills, talents, and emotions into expressive works of art.”
Click to expand...
Many people, not just artists, are going to face a new dawn, where they need different skills to make money, as the ones they had are not in demand any more. That is absolutely a problem that society has to face, but it's wrong to try and use copyright - something already manipulated by the wealthy and powerful to their own ends - to keep them 'safe'.

This is the time when 'real' skill will show through. If you can't 'beat' an AI in commerce, then perhaps you should look to do something else.

Anyone is free to express themselves artistically - and they should. Nobody should expect others will want it. There will be people who do, and who will barter goods/services/money for it, but the law should be nothing to do with that.

I know this will likely be a very unpopular opinion on a forum where many (most ?) make their 'living' through copyright material. It just shows how much the economic models and laws dictate who/what has the 'power'. Nobody is going to feel 'sorry' for the other jobs that will be 'replaced' by AI, that don't have the 'heart' of 'art' to justify why they should get special treatment.

AI is going to disrupt society. Not everybody will be happy, just like the last industrial revolution.

Plumbers and Electricians will still be fine though. Time to make 'art' with cables and pipes, perhaps.
 
VannKraken said:
The near term threat of AI is societal disruption through job displacement coupled with the spread of misinformation (deepfakes, etc) that is much harder to detect.

Skynet comes quite a bit later - if we make it that far.
Click to expand...
I agree , it might be a " dune " like scenario with societal disruption and slavery ... Deepfakes will end democracies . Skynet would be an easier way out
 
Last edited:
mobiuscog said:
I think this gets to the core of the problem, that many miss (as does the actual complaint).

It's not a fear of AI taking away creativity, or the humanity of art - it's a fear that it takes away the economy and there is less money in 'art'.

Many industries have become commodotised over the years, and music/art is now hitting that more than ever - there are alread sweat-shops around the world that can churn out 'average' artwork, and every day people buy cards, see pictures and hear music that are not 'art' by the article standard... AI will just beat them all in the rush to the bottom.

Society is in many ways very simple - some humans like to express themselves and some humans are willing to barter money (or whatever) for that art. AI does not change that, but it massively disrupts the capitalist economy and those who see art as a 'business' rather than simply:

Many people, not just artists, are going to face a new dawn, where they need different skills to make money, as the ones they had are not in demand any more. That is absolutely a problem that society has to face, but it's wrong to try and use copyright - something already manipulated by the wealthy and powerful to their own ends - to keep them 'safe'.

This is the time when 'real' skill will show through. If you can't 'beat' an AI in commerce, then perhaps you should look to do something else.

Anyone is free to express themselves artistically - and they should. Nobody should expect others will want it. There will be people who do, and who will barter goods/services/money for it, but the law should be nothing to do with that.

I know this will likely be a very unpopular opinion on a forum where many (most ?) make their 'living' through copyright material. It just shows how much the economic models and laws dictate who/what has the 'power'. Nobody is going to feel 'sorry' for the other jobs that will be 'replaced' by AI, that don't have the 'heart' of 'art' to justify why they should get special treatment.

AI is going to disrupt society. Not everybody will be happy, just like the last industrial revolution.

Plumbers and Electricians will still be fine though. Time to make 'art' with cables and pipes, perhaps.
Click to expand...
Very very few will be happy ( the gods ) most will be unhappy ( the useless ) , If you hope to become one of the gods , check the maths again ... it is highly highly unlikely . Plumbers and electricians would be fine in a non disrupted democratic society where most people are still working and where it is still possible to tell the difference between what is real and what isn't
 
One upside is that LLMs are quite literally averaging machines, so I'm finding what tends to arise from AI generated art is the creative equivalent of being "the average of the five people you spend the most time with". It may be passable, or even come across as remarkable at first, but the more you see/hear it, the more same-y and one-dimensional it becomes.

For example, if you spend any time at all looking at the output of the very best character models right now, the images can seem utterly unbelievable and impossible for a human to surpass. But then, it becomes increasingly obvious that it's really just a handful of tropes, styles, poses, facial features, etc that have been copied from sources and become cliches learned by the model to remix with impressive technical accuracy. Under scrutiny, the creative seams readily become clear. AI generation is really just an elaborate illusion, not true expression from a living soul expressing something of their lived experience through the creative work. It's not saying anything, it's just optimizing the average reproduction of what is expected to be said.

So I'm not worried about generated AI replacing human creativity so much as "flooding the zone with shit" (to use a Steve Bannon phrase, sorry), such that people with average tastes may well be so engaged with perfectly average content generated from endlessly derivative themes that demand for anything that truly cuts through the noise becomes an endangered species. Netflix, in a nutshell.

That said, in every era, creative genius has always meant doing something that bucks the trends of the day, and, by definition of being something new, hasn't been creatively "industrialized" yet. Picasso's early works as a teenager were technically proficient and bog standard for the art of the time. His work only got truly interesting when he started to purposely break the mold around 1906. If the machines learn to do that, then we're screwed!
 
This has been discussed many times on this forum - AI doesn't brand itself (at least not yet). And successful artists are brands ("Sell the brand - not the music"). So no, AI will not replace them, at least not the kind of AI we have right now.

People still watch other people do things that AI and other types of automation do better. Chess is a great example: AI is vastly better at chess than any human. But humans still watch other humans play chess.

Any art that is not branded (e.g. library music or stock video) most likely will be replaced by AI.
 
VannKraken said:
The near term threat of AI is societal disruption through job displacement coupled with the spread of misinformation (deepfakes, etc) that is much harder to detect.

Skynet comes quite a bit later - if we make it that far.
Click to expand...
The implications for art, music and literature are indeed disturbing, but the misinformation (deepfakes) aspect, to me, is truly terrifying. I already live in a democracy where a subset of the voting population lives in an alternate reality from me. Where Facts have become facts depending on how many people you can persuade and actual, real video evidence is discounted regularly. And I have always had an affinity for the goddess Eris, go figure.
 
We'll have to re-evaluate our understanding of 'art'.

'Art' as in a creative piece that is solely created in order to serve a commercial purpose will be and to some extent already is subject to industrialization. Whatever tool you use to fulfill the task is irrelevant as long as you can deliver in a timely manner. It's the clients who will decide what's acceptable and what's not. Not you. In a capitalist society it will even outlast all the endless discussions about copyright. You can't copyright AI? Add a few brushstrokes of your own and you can. AI is a tool and won't go away. It would be a fight against windmills.
Commercial art will have to be seen more as a craft rather than a form of art.

'Fine art' is going to be a different ball game. It will be niche, but will carry the torch. The difference here is that the bar for artistic excellence is just being raised by a lot as we are asked to be innovative and introduce unique expressions despite, on top, or in addition to the industrialized generative methods of the tools that are there.

I know that won't make a lot of creative people happy. Many will lose their jobs, have to re-invent themselves. Personally, I am not a fan either. In some way I wish the AI revolution would not have started in the creative arena. I'd rather would like to have seen it solve practical tasks. Like taking my trash out or mopping floors.

While charting new waters will be challenging I suggest to anyone who considers themselves ans artist to keep this flame alive by always tending to a project that is just your own, aside from work for clients. Just to stay sane.
Now this might sound a little dramatic... And often it is true that a soup isn't going to be consumed as hot as it is cooked, but I come from the illustration business (as content creator as well as publisher) and it's hitting hard there... It's not yet here in the music industry as much but it's only a matter of time.
 
jehovahlicious said:
The implications for art, music and literature are indeed disturbing, but the misinformation (deepfakes) aspect, to me, is truly terrifying. I already live in a democracy where a subset of the voting population lives in an alternate reality from me. Where Facts have become facts depending on how many people you can persuade and actual, real video evidence is discounted regularly. And I have always had an affinity for the goddess Eris, go figure.
Click to expand...
I agree with you 1,000%. I won't comment further politically other than to say that I live in Idaho, hold the minority viewpoint, and just driving around here reading bumper sticker slogans can be terrifying.

The third leg of the stool after AI disruption and misinformation is social media and algorithmic news delivery, where people can live in their own echo chambers and rabbit holes without ever thinking about the other side or even the middle ground.

I have two teenagers and what they are going to be facing down the road scares me at times, but then I do try to keep in mind that humans are also capable of great works, compassion, etc, as well. It's too bad that more people don't explore and participate in the creation of art, which is a gateway to so many positive things - including examining history, appreciation of other cultures, etc.

Edit: sp
 
VannKraken said:
I agree with you 1,000%. I won't comment further politically other than to say that I live in Idaho, hold the minority viewpoint, and just driving around here reading bumper sticker slogans can be terrifying.

The third leg of the stool after AI disruption and misinformation is social media and algorithmic news delivery, where people can live in their own echo chambers and rabbit holes without ever thinking about the other side or even the middle ground.

I have two teenagers and what they are going to be facing down the road scares me at times, but then I do try to keep in mind that humans are also capable of great works, compassion, etc, as well. It's too bad that more people don't explore and participate in the creation of art, which is a gateway to so many positive things - including examining history, appreciation of other cultures, etc.

Edit: sp
Click to expand...
Social media echo chambers and online vocal activists came before AI , after AI " sides " won't matter anymore ... same thing for voting , political parties .... Just like reality , history is already being deconstructed to fit a desired narative . Social engineering has already shown negative effects but it is about to get much much worse with AI and transhumanism . It isn't only about art , it is about everything
 
Dystopian84 said:
Social media echo chambers and online vocal activists came before AI , after AI " sides " won't matter anymore ... same thing for voting , political parties .... Just like reality , history is already being deconstructed to fit a desired narative . Social engineering has already shown negative effects but it is about to get much much worse with AI and transhumanism . It isn't only about art , it is about everything
Click to expand...
Agreed. It’s a multiplicative effect when these forces intersect and has broad implications.
 
VannKraken said:
.I have two teenagers and what they are going to be facing down the road scares me at times, but then I do try to keep in mind that humans are also capable of great works, compassion, etc, as well. It's too bad that more people don't explore and participate in the creation of art, which is a gateway to so many positive things - including examining history, appreciation of other cultures, etc.

Edit: sp
Click to expand...
Absolutely! I remain, as always, cautiously optimistic.
 
VannKraken said:
I have two teenagers and what they are going to be facing down the road scares me at times...
Click to expand...
I have a teenage daughter, who is studying art as her main subject. She is passionate about it, and I do my very best to encourage her. Sure, we have some other subjects as a 'safety net' but the intention is to help her follow this creative passion as much as she can.

At the same time, we're learning everything we can about AI, and trying to see where the path will lead. I suspect my postion as a programmer will be far less sustainable within 5 years, but I'm also looking to move away from that as I head into retirement.

There are many worries for teenagers to hold, along with the 'usual' growing pains they are faced with climate change, damaged economies, divisive politics and now AI. I remember as someone who grew up with home computers and 'the internet' how exciting new developments turned into more complexity and less local community. I can only imagine that the onset of AI, will be both quicker and also more disruptive.

I have hope - after all, humans adapt and change, and the young people of today have grown up with huge challenges such as the pandemic that left no doubt as to the growing problems - they understand they've been left a bad legacy, and the future is theirs to take. I just wonder at what point things will change direction.

AI has the potential to solve so many problems, so long as it's not constrained to behave as the old-boys club desire. The world 'needs' a change, and perhaps this is the beginning.
 
mobiuscog said:
I have a teenage daughter, who is studying art as her main subject. She is passionate about it, and I do my very best to encourage her. Sure, we have some other subjects as a 'safety net' but the intention is to help her follow this creative passion as much as she can.

At the same time, we're learning everything we can about AI, and trying to see where the path will lead. I suspect my postion as a programmer will be far less sustainable within 5 years, but I'm also looking to move away from that as I head into retirement.

There are many worries for teenagers to hold, along with the 'usual' growing pains they are faced with climate change, damaged economies, divisive politics and now AI. I remember as someone who grew up with home computers and 'the internet' how exciting new developments turned into more complexity and less local community. I can only imagine that the onset of AI, will be both quicker and also more disruptive.

I have hope - after all, humans adapt and change, and the young people of today have grown up with huge challenges such as the pandemic that left no doubt as to the growing problems - they understand they've been left a bad legacy, and the future is theirs to take. I just wonder at what point things will change direction.

AI has the potential to solve so many problems, so long as it's not constrained to behave as the old-boys club desire. The world 'needs' a change, and perhaps this is the beginning.
Click to expand...
Humans adapt and change when they are given enough time to do so ( it happened many time in the past ) . The main problem with the current state of AI is going to be time , it is an exponential evolution and that is unprecedented , it will change a lot of thing over a very very short period of time ... this idea might be shocking and counter intuitive for most people so every time I get the chance I ask this type of question " would you choose 1 million $ cash or one cent that doubles every day for a month ? " and most of the time I get the 1 million cash answer which is a silly choice .
 
Post Singularity said:
Humans adapt and change when they are given enough time to do so ( it happened many time in the past ) . The main problem with the current state of AI is going to be time , it is an exponential evolution and that is unprecedented , it will change a lot of thing over a very very short period of time ... this idea might be shocking and counter intuitive for most people so every time I get the chance I ask this type of question " would you choose 1 million $ cash or one cent that doubles every day for a month ? " and most of the time I get the 1 million cash answer which is a silly choice .
Click to expand...
Before deciding, I would have to ask if my family still gets the payout at 30 days if something should happen to me before day 26 or 27. :grin: I get your point though, my monkey brain will be spinning.
 
Post Singularity said:
Humans adapt and change when they are given enough time to do so ( it happened many time in the past ) . The main problem with the current state of AI is going to be time , it is an exponential evolution and that is unprecedented , it will change a lot of thing over a very very short period of time ... this idea might be shocking and counter intuitive for most people so every time I get the chance I ask this type of question " would you choose 1 million $ cash or one cent that doubles every day for a month ? " and most of the time I get the 1 million cash answer which is a silly choice .
Click to expand...
I always would pick the 1 million cash today because tomorrow is not promised. Yes, doing the math would yield over a billion dollars after 30 days. But is this a guarantee? Or is there any risk that I could lose some of that money after the 30 days? Just give me 1 million cash and let me live in regret later. I’d simply enjoy the 1 million cash and not worry about a possibility of 1 billion dollars after 30 days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom