.

[MiBrassFS]

.

[The Brute Squad]

Definitely not. The same argument given for music is valid for art.

[gocsick]

I am going to play devils advocate for a second...

AI-generated art can be acceptable for commercial use when it’s openly acknowledged as such. You can argue that AI is a too not a substitute for human creativity. When guided by human intent, it can speed up design and lowers barriers to expression—much like the camera, Microsoft paint, clip art or digital editor once did. Transparency ensures authenticity and respect for audiences, while recognizing that the artistic vision, judgment, and meaning still originate with the human creator. The problem comes in when the AI tools are not acknowledged in the process and people try to pass off AI generated art/music as their own.

There is also a practical aspect... AI is really bad a pure generative tasks. It is very easy to spot essays written by AI.. it is easy to generate art etc. but they are generally very bad. AI works well in an iterative sense.. when you give it a design idea.. then keep refining..

I have found AI to be very useful in my writing... I use speech to text to brainstorm my ideas... I give that jumbled mess to chatGPT to organize into an outline that makes sense... usually it is on the right track but needs serious refining.. I look at it tell it where I want to make changes.. and iterate for a while. I use it as a tool to make large changes in real time.. once I am happy with the outline and framework.. I can bang out an article or a review very quickly.. then have the AI act as a glorified spell checker... If I just said "write a review of this article" to chatGPT it would come back with utter crap. Same thing with programming... If I ask chatGPT to code something up chances are it won't work the way it is intended..

[bloke]

AI basically steals from everyone, rather than an individual.

As far as music is concerned, the AI music that I've heard isn't necessarily stuff that I would label is bad, but it has never prompted me to listen to it for more than 10 or 15 seconds.

I think it's sort of like most television programs, and I wouldn't doubt that most new television programs are AI generated. Most new TV shows seem to be just about as dumb as those that were created before there was AI.

[MiBrassFS]

.

[bloke]

To my point, I think that's a pretty accurate representation of the average human being's concept of what a tuba is.

Stuff like this is why I suspect that a lot of AI is going to end up being C- to D- quality information, and - where value judgments are involved - greatly shaded by the value judgments of those who program AI.

People are certainly using it and going to use it more and more, just like they trust sources like Wikipedia - which can be edited on the fly by most anyone.

Hell... People believe "the news".
It's always occurred to me that the three most dangerous things about humans are their gullibility, their quickness to anger, and their willingness to "join up" - much in the way that dogs form packs.

[Mary Ann]

One of the things I have noted is that the PBS station, which of course loudly promotes the arts, has synthesized music for all its theme songs etc. Let's promote the arts, but let's not ourselves support them by having real music that we play for the station theme song.

[bloke]

One of the things I have noted is that the PBS station, which of course loudly promotes the arts, has synthesized music for all its theme songs etc. Let's promote the arts, but let's not ourselves support them by having real music that we play for the station theme song.

I recall that...but I don't "note" those radio stations very much.
The remind me of some singers. Their music is great, but then - for whatever reason - they believe that we - in addition to their singing abilities - view them as great forward-thinking intellects and want to hear all about their radical political views.

youtube: I can listen to random/poorly-selected "classical music" (also for free) without the hourly radical political commentary nor bizarrely-selected "news" stories.

[Mary Ann]

In general, our local radio station has good stuff to listen to in the car. When the news comes on, I shut it off. Same with TV -- there are some things I like, such as This Old House. But no news, bleah. No news, period, FWIW. It is all propagandized one direction or another, and I eventually find stuff out that I might need to know. We have one good weather station.

[MiBrassFS]

.

[Tubeast]

I guess this works just like everything else in life, such as crafts, cooking, art work or music:

- Doing stuff yourself may be cheap on first glance. If you´re talented, the results might work. If you additionally invest enough time and stubbornness, the result may actually be functional, good and pretty.
- In many cases, after several fruitless attempts, you may experience that for YOU, paying a professional to do their thing may yield the cheapest, fastest, and overall best path to a successfully finished project.

There is a growing industry of well-paid "AI-whisperers" whose expertise is to post-product those first AI-generated shots into something that may be closer to the desired outcome.
Just like with real-world economics, You can mess with stuff youself or pay one of those. If it´s good enough for YOU, that´s what counts.

Whether you scribble a hand-written and xeroxed recital announcement, use WORD and have a printed bland, but neat handout flyer, have a paid artist design a PR campaign or you produce an animated, AI-generated video to be broadcast on FaceBook: I still won´t attend your recital.
At best, it may reflect the magnitude and importance you yourself assign to your contribution to world culture.

[poomshanka]

FWIW, having worked on the commercial side of artwork for decades (advertising/marketing, design, etc.), implementation of AI in enterprise settings is slowed by rights management issues. The AI models themselves are improving at a frightening pace, to include tools that not only generate the images themselves, but rez them up using AI and interpolating details into the images that aren't necessarily inherent in the original material. Check out Topaz Labs as one example.

Adobe's Firefly supposedly circumvents this by training its AI solely on Adobe IP. They also offer full legal indemnification for enterprise users that implement Firefly-generated content in commercial settings. However, there have been some questions recently about whether or not Adobe's sheets are totally clean. I guess it's a bit like saying "the non-peeing section in the community pool".

For things like recital flyers or whatever, it's not really a legal issue, per se, at least not the way it is for enterprise-level usage. Nobody's gonna sue some broke tuba player for using an AI-generated horn on their recital program. And like all tools/instruments, it ultimately comes down to who's wielding it.

My $.02, your mileage may vary...

...Dave