Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by stale2002 162 days ago
> Someone said, "using AI is like using an aimbot for music."

Ok. Lets go with that analogy. Whats the problem with someone playing a single player game with an aimbot on? Sure they wont get good at the aiming part. But it feels kinda up to them on if that matters or not.

Additionally, I wouldn't see anything morally wrong with that. Now, if someone entered into a music competition, where only human made music was allow then I agree that this would be "cheating". But what if its not that and the listeners simply are OK with the "aimbotted" music?
1 comments
ZoomZoomZoom 162 days ago
> Whats the problem with someone playing a single player game with an aimbot on?

People are doing it on the server where all the musicians live, and they have no other place to go, only disconnect.

link
stale2002 162 days ago
> where all the musicians live, and they have no other place to go, only disconnect.

No actually. Those musicians are free to continue making whatever music that they want and can refuse to listen to the AI music if they dont want to.

The fact that 2 other, unrelated 3rd parties both like to make AI music and listen to AI music is not the musicians area of control here. They do not get to decide what other people like to listen to or make.

link
ZoomZoomZoom 162 days ago
You're confused at multiple levels.

> free to continue making whatever music that they want

Never said they weren't.

> can refuse to listen to the AI music if they don't want to

A musician can be a listener, indeed. If you believe a listener has this freedom and will keep it, you're most probably mistaken. No one besides musicians and discerning, ideologically relentless listeners is interested in making NN-generated music distinguishable and supporting the right of filtering it. The goal is to supplant one with the other.

> The fact that 2 other, unrelated 3rd parties both like to make AI music and listen to AI music…

Listeners is not an unrelated party to a musician. They form a vital symbiosis. And it's a zero-sum game, as listener's attention is a limited resource.

> They do not get to decide what other people like to listen to or make.

This is an unrelated point. Who decides what is a separate topic.

The crux of the issue is that we have two types of superficially similar product which are in fact substantially different (hope this does not require clarification) and incomparable in terms of resources necessary for their creation. This begets unprecedented power imbalance and incentives for deceit, biased legislation and other moves to solidify this situation.

link
stale2002 158 days ago
> Never said they weren't.

Great! Problem solved then.

> A musician can be a listener, indeed.

Ok! They can listen to different music then.

> Listeners is not an unrelated party to a musician

No, musicians do not own other listeners. If other listeners want to listen to something else, thats their choice.

> we have two types of superficially similar product which are in fact substantially different

Ok! You are free to care, and other can think they are similar enough for them and their own purposes.

link