AI singer-songwriter ‘Anna Indiana’ debuted her first single ‘Betrayed by this Town’ on X, formerly Twitter—and listeners were not too impressed.

  • PoisonedPrisonPanda@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Looking at the hateful comments gives me shivers when thinking how humans will proceed with machines on an emotional level.

    If we ever reach sentinent AI, it will go towards I-Robot plot. Ill bet.

    Edit typos

    • BruceTwarzen@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      People can call ai generated movie shit or boring or whatever all they want, but i heard for example Henry styles watermelon sugar high, that song was popular as hell, and it might as well just be ai generated mambo jambo

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There can be nothing new or original out of AI because all of its inputs are stolen from what already exists. Real creativity comes solely from humans. Also, that clip - the song, singing, and visual - is dreadful in every way.

    This needs to be hammered into techbro’s heads until they shut the fuck up about the so-called “AI” revolution.

    • AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I get the sentiment, but don’t really agree. Humans’ inputs are also from what already exists, and music is generally inspired from other music which is why “genres” even exist. AI’s not there yet, but the statement “real creativity comes solely from humans” Needs Citation. Humans are a bunch of chemical reactions and firing synapses, nothing out of the realm of the possible for a computer.

    • NumbersCanBeFun@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      There can be nothing new or original out of AI because all of its inputs are stolen from what already exists.

      Ummm don’t humans learn exactly the same way? Pretty sure some random person wrote the textbook I read. Should I cite them every time I come go with a new idea based off of that knowledge?

      Also, people steal shit all the time. I think everyone is looking for excuses to be upset.

      • Belgdore@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The anger comes from the fact that companies are using AI instead of hiring artists.

        There is a distinction between a human being inspired by an existing piece of art and an ai creating something from other art. The human has to experience it through the lens of the human experience and create using the human body. AI takes multiple pieces of art and essentially makes a collage.

    • Hubi@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Still, AI is able to “create” new things by a combination of existing concepts. It can generate a Roomba in the style of Van Gogh for example, which is probably not something that currently exists.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Roomba in the style of Van Gogh” is a new combination of existing things, but it can never create something truly original. Derivative.

          • toomanyjoints69@lemmygrad.mlBanned
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The style of an authors prose is not derivative. Read your favorite book and then tell an ai to write a short story in the style of that author.

            Unless you have trully blind taste you are going to notice just how wooden the ai writing is.

            An excellent example will be some sort of pulp novel where the author uses canned phrases. Dan Abbnet has a very repetitive style that lends itself well to ai, yet ai can not write a convincing Ciaphas Cain story. Convincing as in, if you showed it to me and i didnt know what ai was, i wouldnt think it was fanfiction.

            • Feddyteddy@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Is this ability to create something original and non-derivative a basic human ability or is it something that very few are capable of only after many years of developing their ability?

              Are you able to right now create something original and non-derivative as an example?

              • toomanyjoints69@lemmygrad.mlBanned
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I dont feel like it but here is something I wrote with original prose, fitting the criteria of originality. As a favor for me arguing with you, please give me feedback on my prose

                Not to talk down to you, but do you know what prose means? I actually used to not know what that word means so its not an embarassing thing to not know. That might be why I percieve you as “talking past me.” Prose is a writer’s style and choice of language. So purple prose is writing in an overly flowerly and annoying way. Every writer, regardless of talent and skill, has original prose. I think the only amount of practice required to be able to achieve this is to write enough to have a consistent style. So since you completed public school you also probably meet the criteria.

                I have done the specific experiment I suggested using Dan Abbnet’s works with Chat GPT because I consider Dan to be my favorite author who makes repetitive pulpy fiction that I think AI idealy should be able to replicate, but it really can’t.

    • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not the techbros leading this, it’s the BBAs and MBAs that wouldn’t know art if Michelangelo came to life and slapped them in the face with the sistine chapel.

    • azimir@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve been doing a lot of using, testing, and evaluating LLMs and GPT-style models for generating code and text/prose. Some of it is just general use to see how it behaves, some has been explicit evaluation of creative writing, and a bunch of it is code generation to test out how we need to modify our CS curriculum in light of these new tools.

      It’s an impressive piece of technology, but it’s not very creative. It’s meh. The results are meh. Which is to be expected since it’s a statistical model that’s using a large body of prior work to produce a reasonable approximation of what it’s seen before. It trends towards the mean, not the best.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m excited for how these tools will be used by human creators to accomplish things they could never do alone, and in that aspect it is a revolutionary technology. I hate that their marketing calls it “AI” though, the only intelligence involved is the human user that creates prompts and curates results.

      • AgnosticMammal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This’d explain why inexperienced users of ai would inevitably get mediocre results. Still takes creativity to get stolen mediocrity.

        • TheMechanic@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You have to know how to operate the oven to reheat store bought pie. Generative LLMs are machines like ovens, and turning the knobs is not creativity. Not operating the oven correctly gets you Sharon Weiss results.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right just as soon as all the people proclaiming that can point to the soul bit of my brain. There is absolutely no reason to say that AI cannot be creative there’s nothing fundamentally magic about creativity that means only humans can do it.

      • TheActualDevil@sffa.community
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re equating creativity to the soul. They’re not the same thing. But we can definitely look at the brain and see what parts light up when perform creative tasks.

    • rynzcycle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I see it an more an inability to analyze, evaluate, and edit. A lot of “creativity” in the world of musical composition is putting together existing elements and seeing what happens. Any composer from pop to the very avant-garde, is influenced and sometimes even borrow from their predecessors (it’s why copyright law is so complex in music).

      It’s the ability to make judgements, does this sound good/interesting, does this have value, would anyone want to listen to this, and adjust accordingly that will lead to something original and great. Humans are so good at this, we might be making edits before the notes hit the page (Brainstorming). This AI clearly wasn’t. And deciding on value, seems wildly complex for modern day computers. Humans can agree on it (if you like Rock, but hate country for example).

      So in the end, they are “creative” but in a monkey-typewritter situation, but who is going to sort through the billions of songs like this to find the one masterpiece?

    • aiccount@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yes, it is literally impossible for any AI to ever exist that can be creative. At no point in the future will it ever create anything creative, that is something only human beings can do. Anybody that doesn’t understand this is simply incapable of using logic and they have no right to contribute to the conversation at all. This has all already been decided by people who understand things really well and anyone who objects is obviously stupid.

        • aiccount@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I was agreeing with you. I’m so sick of people thinking that “someday AI might be creative”. Like no, it’s literally impossible unless some day AI becomes human(impossible) because human is the only thing capable of creativity. What have I said that you disagree with? You’re not one of them are you? What’s with all this obsessive AI love?

            • aiccount@monyet.cc
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah the current popular LLMs, absolutely they are, you couldn’t be more right.

              We were talking about “AI” though. Are you implying that you think some day AI might be capable of creativity, and that creativity isn’t strictly a human trait?

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I put “AI” in scare quotes specifically because I do not believe we are having an “AI revolution”. These are not AI.

                I think AI can exist but that’s not what we have right now. What we have are jumped up algos that can somewhat fake it.

                • aiccount@monyet.cc
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Even those future “real” AIs are going to be taking in human input and regurgitating it back to us. The only difference is that the algorithms processing the data will continue to get better and better. There is not some cutoff where we go from 100% unintelligent chatbot to 100% intelligent AI. It is a gradual spectrum.

      • AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh shit, I thought you had forgotten a “/s” at the end, but reading your other comments this is actually what you believe and how you talk. So… yeah, I’m not going to take someone who cites “people who understand things really well” as a source at face value.

        • aiccount@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well then you didn’t read very many of my comments. I made this first comment because the post I responded to was so absurd so I just exaggerated the ridiculousness that they said. Of course AI is capable of creativity and intelligence. If you look at the long back and forth that this sparked you would see that this is my stance. After I made this over the top, very sarcastic comment, OP corrected themself to clarify that when they said “AI” they actually only meant the current state of LLMs. They have since admitted that it is indeed true that AI absolutely can be capable of creativity and intelligence.

    • Cagi@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Generative” is such a misleading term. It’s not generating anything, it is replicative.

  • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    That picture is weird, there’s some AI nonsense going on with the microphone shock mount, and her jaw doesn’t line up with the rest of her face. Plus the usual uncanny valley weirdness of an AI generated image.

    Not even going to bother with the song.

  • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think in the context of K-Pop it makes total sense, the music and everything around is anyway just done after a formula which has proven to work very well to sell. While right now you need to put children and teenagers through years of rigorous training and expose them to immense stress and pressure so most of them break, with AI you can easily replicate the same formula and refine much quicker without throwing so many young people into the meat grinder of the music industry.

    More money and control for the companies less people killing themselves.

    The ones who really burn for the music will make music despite AI music being available. And they also will find an audience, even though it might be smaller.

    • reksas@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      What I worry about this is mainstream becoming “accustomed” to assemblyline content by AI. What if eventually people start actually consider the conformity to be good thing and originality deviant? Of course there will always be people who dont care what other think but vast majority of people seems to at least on some level be very conscious about it.

      Imagine being the weird one just because you don’t like ai generated crap

      • Jeena@jemmy.jeena.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have you seen the movie WALL-E? The people on the space-ship they’re consuming engaging content all day long, nobody is creating anything anymore, so all this must been created by the AI. I’m just trying to say that it’s not a novel idea. Writers and artists have been imagining this future for ourselves for a long time.

      • The Doctor@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        When you think about it, that’s pretty much the history of boy bands, going all the way back to the Monkees. The faces were carefully chosen for demographic reasons, the songs were written by the labels and targeted for specific demographics, the faces’ histories were largely constructed fictions (and published through “unauthorized” fan magazines and books that were ghostwritten by the labels and laundered through other publishing companies). The only real difference is that now software is being used for it rather than marketing teams.

  • Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not so much an expert rather than just parroting what I saw, but according to a cursory search, and a Twitter community note I saw from a friend, the voice used by this project is Synthesizer V, which is actually a perfectly legitimate piece of software for using digital voices in music production. If you’ve heard of Vocaloid, or know about Hatsune Miku, SynthV is basically a competitor in that space.

    Going back to the community note, the voice used is actually called Natalie, and apparently the TOS of SynthV does not allow use of its voices using a name that’s different to what was given. So they essentially can’t present the Natalie voice as Anna, which they are.

    Tweet + Community Note

  • Jamie@jamie.moe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have a feeling they knew how this would be received considering it seems like they’re rage-baiting and acting pretentious to try and get attention.

    • Jamie@jamie.moe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I accidentally submitted early, but also, I wrote out the lyrics. It’s the most bland version of those breakup-depression kind of songs imaginable. I guess people voted it as “feel-good” out of irony.

      Sitting at my favorite cafe

      Sipping my tea it’s saturday

      Thinking about all he’s done, to everyone

      This town is full of broken dreams

      Shattered hopes, and silent screams

      Somebody please help me

      Betrayed by this town

      Let’s tear it all down

      We’re all just destined to fall

      I’ve lost it all

      Betrayed by this town

      Let’s tear it all down

      We’re all just destined to fall

      We’ve lost it all

      Alone in the streets, alone in my thoughts

      Thinking of all our favorite spots

      I thought someday things might turn around

      But I was lost and never found

      Betrayed by this town

      Let’s tear it all down

      We’re all just destined to fall

      I’ve lost it all

      Betrayed by this town

      Let’s tear it all down

      We’re all just destined to fall

      We’ve lost it all

      Faces painted with smiles

      Lies are told

      A facade of unity

      A vitality sold

      So I sit here in silence

      Just wondering how

      To rewrite the tales

      This town won’t allow

      Betrayed by this town

      Let’s tear it all down

      We’re all just destined to fall

      I’ve lost it all

      Betrayed by this town

      Let’s tear it all down

      We’re all just destined to fall

      We’ve lost it all

      I’ve lost it all

      We’ve lost it all

      • Steve@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Betrayed by this town / Let’s burn it all down “ might be the most relevant chorus of today’s music. It’ll be stuck in my head all night and would fit right in at most protests

  • saigot@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    YouTube link for those that want to see it for themselves. ~~https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3T175LTQFnw~~ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0l71Hh1gPkE

    To me the biggest problem with it is that it doesn’t understand the relationship between the meanings of the words and the melody of the song. It kinda makes it sound like a bad parody song. I think if you looked at just the lyrics or just the melody they would be quite convincing on their own.

  • anothermember@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t understand why people are so cynical about this, it seems like a harmless demonstration of the current state of the technology.

      • ani@endlesstalk.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        How so? It’s pretty good, wait a few years and it will definitely be as good or better than human musicians. If you’re talking as if it is a treat to musicians, they can only adapt and use such techs to push forward. All professions that require reasoning are endangered, not only music.

        • rabirabirara@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am a musician and I like the technology (even wanted to do research on music generation in uni), but I still think the notion that music generation will surpass human capabilities in a few years is naive.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think it sounds the same as other shitty music I hear all the time.

    I fully expect AI music to be part of the musical scene going forward.

    Does it feel dystopian? Yeah, it’s not a fun future. But this is here to stay.