Technology

59270 readers

3476 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

122

Actually, That AI Drake and The Weeknd Song Is Not Eligible for a Grammy (gizmodo.com)

submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

38 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Actually, That AI Drake and The Weeknd Song Is Not Eligible for a Grammy::The song "Heart on My Sleeve" was pulled from streaming services after it was revealed to have been created with artificial intelligence.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If they make an AI song they are allowed to sell it and people are allowed to listen to it but, that particular song just isn't eligible for the competition that is The Grammy.

When artist make music they WANT to win a Grammy but it is not a REQUIRED part of business model. Most music produced in the world do not win Grammies and still able to make money.

[+] iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world -19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yes, but we aren't talking about songs which are not entered in the Grammys.

We are talking about the Grammys laying down shortsighted rules to protect their image, not to progress the medium in any meaningful way.

[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is a different set of arguments than the ones you started with.

This is more about wether it's good or not for music to ban AI from the Grammies.

I think it's good. I don't think AI is art and I think it's theft. The only reason AI music is able to exist is because it is stealing other people's hard work.

Artists work their entire life to develop unique sounds that are influenced by their personal experiences and tastes.

Then a AI techbro (but more likely a multi billion dollar corporation) steals it without the artists permission and without compensation.

The goal of AI enthusiasts is to break down artists rights fast enough so that proper regulation don't have time to set in. Because people like you despise art and artist. Every time I get involved in these discussion you can feel the pure contempt and the ones that can't keep the mask on properly gloat at the brazen theft they are doing.

In order for AI to be good for art it needs to be regulated and since it is not regulated organizations like the Grammies need to step in and protect the artists they have represented for decades.

But feel free to cry and piss about how unfair it is to have rules for things.

[+] iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world -7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I didn't say enything about unfair, nor did i cry or piss.

All I've said about AI is that they are simply banning what they don't understand. All generative processes rely on the influence and templates created by those who came before them.

Everyone is having very emotional and visceral reactions to AI tools, meanwhile these tools are not even remotely close to mimicking or surpassing human performance.

This is another repeat of what happened 40 years ago when electronica and synths made their way into mainstream music.

[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You say that you are not but I can see both the tears and piss in your 20 different comments across several different people. I even think there is some shit in there. You know AI is different from electronica, I know it's different. Why should I pretend that it isn't for the sake of your pissy little tantrum?