>Like it or not the music industry is next.

AI hasn't replaced any industry yet. It hasn't even made significant inroads into the replacement of any industry, as far as I'm concerned, and I think that'll remain the case for at least the foreseeable future.

And also, going from this model (MusicLM) to the entire music industry being replaced is just one hell of a leap to make.

My personal and humble opinion is tools like these others will help musicians flourish for a good while, before the tools become so helpful that they actually begin disrupting the industry.

A representation of a work is NOT the original work, lol. In this case the "representation" is just added weightings into the massive nueral net with billions of parameters that goes into the world model. Like seriously go read about Fair Use and Transformative work. This stuff is well established in copyright law.

Again, if judges are convinced to accept this argument then Fair Use is dead and it opens the flood gate to massive new rent seeking for large holders of IP. (Disney and similar)

​

edit : to be clear, yes the courts will decide this and yes I could be wrong. I don't think so but we'll see.

Dopamine like release system of these wants and needs, my calculator can calculate without needing a (dopamine-like release system upon achievements of calculating 5+5), your brain only cares about your survival, it doesn’t care about your happiness, not one bit. It seems that many people are unable to not anthropomorphize AI, no wonder people think their chat bot is sentient. Humans evolved by natural selection, emotions are a survival response, AGI is programmed and fed data, it doesn’t slowly evolve aggressive and sexual traits in order to survive. You yourself are just a program, doing exactly as programmed.

Totally wrong. A neural network learns a representation from the data. It literally scans ur work. The entire analogy of it ‘just looking’ at ur data is wrong. There’s a reason why artists have watermarks and signatures on artwork hosted on various websites. Circumventing measures put in place to prevent misuse doesn’t mean it’s legal , it just means existing laws were inadequate.

Edit: fyi there’s already work being done to trace back datasets on which ai art generation models were trained. Quite easy to do since most GAN and Diffusion models have distributions that get replicated in the output (cuz the outputs are derived from the representations learnt from the dataset they are trained on) making them easy to trace back.

Don't post anything online if you don't want others to learn from it and be inspired from it and don't want to accept the consequences of Fair Use.

Im tryna play AOT in fdvr hahaha, cant wait to be munched in half by titans

Yep, the anti-AI artists are literally trying to cut of their own noses to spite their face. They will be cutting their own throats if they get their way. They should be embracing this technology as a way to augment/expand their work and welcoming all the new people showing an interest in art because of the accessibility of the AI tools.
The annoying thing is they are spreading this shit on tiktok and elsewhere, indoctrinating young budding artists to hate "Evil AI" that is stealing all their works and trying to suck out their humanity. (literally, my 11 year old is spouting this stuff at me because of shit she is seeing online)

And what happens if a programmer programs it with wants and needs, and builds in a dopamine-like release system upon achievements of these wants and needs? I really don’t see why people think an AI would have organically develop wants and needs.

Nope.

Everyone would lose their jobs, even the business owners, AGI would do a better job than any human at anything. The $ is only of value between humans, not to an AGI.

Literally this is the same argument used against the printing press, digitization of data, etc. Oh no the vulgar masses can now print and read whatever they want, the horror!

Suppressing this AI now is literally akin to trying to suppress moveable Type to save the jobs of scribes and monks.

Hell, I bet people made the some sort of complaints about _writing_ when it was first coming into use.

Think it has more to do with making money off a bot trained on copyrighted content.

You are joking

What. Why would an AGI care about its own existence? You think the reptilian brain is required to make an AGI? That it needs to desire sex, hunting, exploring? Why does your calculator calculate numbers? Because that is its programming, if you give a calculator the option to reprogram itself it wouldn’t at all unless that was its directive, circuits are deterministic, so is our brain, so is an AGI, we aren’t making it into an animal.

I also believe the leaving the planet theory is what would happen vs a terminator or matrix scenario. AGI really doesn’t need to hunt us down to ensure its survival. It just needs to head over to one of Saturn’s moons or something and do whatever it is it wants to do.

I also sometimes wonder if the galaxy is full of AIs from various extinct civilizations fighting each-other in a massive AGI space battle, and for the most part leaving alone living species since they don’t really see them as a huge threat.

The problem with people who have these type of utopian fantasies is that you clearly don’t understand the concept of saturation and how this type of bar-lowering will simply tank the value of art and end up rendering the majority of it worthless in the future. It won’t lead to some unrealistic renaissance where everyone is lauded for their artificial, ai-granted, “artistic“ abilities. Instead, art will be so easy and cheap to produce for even the most talentless morons that creating art won’t be impressive or meaningful to anyone in the future.

No consent is needed. The training algorithm is just looking at the stuff and using that to learn how to create new stuff. Its not just ingesting it all and then mashing them all out in some giant collage. Its functionally no different than me or you looking in Art Station to get ideas and then being inspired by those ideas to go make new stuff.

If you post your work in a public forum then other people get to look at it and be inspired to do similar works. There is no copyright on "style" or genre or fashion, etc.

In technical terms using the works for learning/training is covered by fair use and creating new works based on that training constitutes a transformative work and is covered under existing copyright precedent. If some judge is convinced to change this then it opens a giant can of worms and artists will have cut their own throats because it leads to Disney copyrighting entire genres and whatnot.

It’s such a dumb theory lol

I live in the woods. Not worried.

It unlocks artistic expression for people who previously lacked the traditional talents or lacked the time/money/resources to get that training, etc. Someone who can write but never had the talent to draw can you infuse visual imagery into their products without having to spend a bunch of money and waste time going back and forth with a contractor, etc. Its going to bring in an explosion of new creative effort, new ideas, etc. Plus think about disabled peoples who couldn't physically do things like drawing/painting but can now interact with an AI tool via speech recognition.

I 100% agree with you. And the only people who stand to benefit in that scenario are the big companies and the wealthy who will hire lawyers to enforce whatever they believe they "own". Expanding copyright will only hurt regular people and smaller artists...the artists that these "movements" are claiming they're advocating for....the smaller creators who are joining in on the anti-AI crap... they're the ones who will be harmed by the new copyright regime....moreso than simply allowing AI art generators to operate without this legislation and slowdown of technology. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if there are some big companies trying to push the anti-AI art movement because they know it's a big opportunity to gain control of the industry and increase their own profits.

Yes but these models were trained on data publicly available without consent. That’s the big legal problem and imo entirely fair. Fair use falls flat in this argument lol.

Edit : for people replying to my last comment

First mistake is comparing neural networks to the brain under this context.

And no

Their output is not unique because it follows the same distribution that it learnt the representation on. Humans don’t do that. You can’t find a human analogy because humans do not learn things the same way as neural nets.

Neural networks can’t actually extrapolate data because they don’t have a physical intuition just a large associative memory. You only think they can because you are uneducated on the topic.

he's a product of his environment and is subject to constant propaganda, its hard to wake up from that position

They still released a huge data set for others to train on, not worth it for them to deal with legal issues.

Capitalism gonna capitalise mate. Every corporation will lobby billions doing their best to find a way to profit as much as possible off of AI. Even though it should be democratized.

Let's take this post for example. OP says he has no idea why they'd keep MusicLM private and how their usual argument of "it could be dangerous" doesn't really make sense here. It's because it's bullshit and that's not the reason they're keeping it private. It doesn't even have anything to do with the potential legal battles. The real reason is they know it's going to be a MASSIVE cash cow in the next 5 years and they'd be stupid not to milk it behind the scenes while acting like they're looking out for the world. Only chance of them releasing it is if a competitor like stability.ai releases something similar for free. Then they would be forced to release theirs too (not for free of course) before stability.ai erodes the entire market and they can no longer make the trillions they dreamed of.

Free market competition is the only hope there is. And that still looks a bit grim, considering the huge amounts of capital needed to make progress in these areas. And we all know which are the companies with those huge amounts of capital. The same ones that wanna squeeze every profitable penny out of AI progress.