AI GNR Songs

[guitarpatch]

Seems like the technology behind AI is getting better every day. For music, there are already examples popping up out there with some interesting results. Some solo John Lennon and McCartney songs being redone as the Beatles, Freddie Mercury, etc…

I’m sure the band will have a pretty strong stance against its use with how they police uploads. However, like piracy and streaming, the industry evolves. 

How do you feel about the inevitable future of an AI Axl and Slash being used? New AI songs, Axl “signing” on Slash’s solo songs or Velvet Revolver tunes, A younger AI Axl being used on official releases? Original AFD/UYI lineups on Chinese Democracy tunes, Etc…

I assume there will be some opinions. I’m sure lines will be crossed 

[Stay.Of.Execution]

Couldn't care less about this shit

[VeeR]

I wouldn't mind. Axl and TB probably have hours of isolated vocal stems to train an AI on. If they can put out an album where Axl actually sounds decent, I am all for it.

[wendirosez]

3 hours ago, guitarpatch said:

Seems like the technology behind AI is getting better every day. For music, there are already examples popping up out there with some interesting results. Some solo John Lennon and McCartney songs being redone as the Beatles, Freddie Mercury, etc…

I’m sure the band will have a pretty strong stance against its use with how they police uploads. However, like piracy and streaming, the industry evolves. 

How do you feel about the inevitable future of an AI Axl and Slash being used? New AI songs, Axl “signing” on Slash’s solo songs or Velvet Revolver tunes, A younger AI Axl being used on official releases? Original AFD/UYI lineups on Chinese Democracy tunes, Etc…

I assume there will be some opinions. I’m sure lines will be crossed 

I think it will have its complications.  I don't think it is right.

[Nintari]

If we let it, it will destroy all the arts. Music, game development, writing... you name it, AI will destroy it. Because you know some businessmen are already checking into the viability of releasing new Sinatra records. Hire a composer, tell AI to sing like Frank and viola... money to burn. And once they figure that out, and the tech matures, it'll be just a computer doing everything. They'll just program it to make new albums from all the greats. And then when that wears off, they'll just invent new greats entirely inside the machine.

I'm not one of those tin-foil-hat people. As a matter of fact, I am the first to roll my eyes at that stuff. But this... this is the real deal, people. And if you care anything at all about art, you should be against it.

[El Guapo]

18 minutes ago, Nintari said:

If we let it, it will destroy all the arts. Music, game development, writing... you name it, AI will destroy it. Because you know some businessmen are already checking into the viability of releasing new Sinatra records. Hire a composer, tell AI to sing like Frank and viola... money to burn. And once they figure that out, and the tech matures, it'll be just a computer doing everything. They'll just program it to make new albums from all the greats. And then when that wears off, they'll just invent new greats entirely inside the machine.

I'm not one of those tin-foil-hat people. As a matter of fact, I am the first to roll my eyes at that stuff. But this... this is the real deal, people. And if you care anything at all about art, you should be against it.

This. It's just wrong.

[WhazUp]

The problem will be when the AI tech gets to really mimic the human condition.  You would tell it to write a GNR song and it will spend 12 years adding and removing layers before actually producing anything

[wendirosez]

Well its destroying legacys which people worked hard for as we speak . 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CrrAFsjNIp1/

https://youtu.be/S9JDpH9DhLY

 

Edited May 3, 2023 by wendirosez
Show as link instead

[Draguns]

There needs to be safeguards around AI. I think we are heading in the wrong path with it. 

[wendirosez]

4 minutes ago, Draguns said:

There needs to be safeguards around AI. I think we are heading in the wrong path with it. 

Gonna be a war

[YourRocketDing]

I don't need your future war,

It buries the humans, and fuck the poor,

Let's use a.i, to make a new all-purpose grocery store (ain't that rich?)

Now we need John Connor, for this future war.

....

"Now thanks to the lame-ass A.I, I'm going home..." *SMASH*

[doakes]

Let’s just have AI create MyGNRForum members that will continually spam this message board with endless topics advocating for unoriginal, uninspired, high tech plagiarism!

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, Oldest Goat said:

It's a small but still meaningful comfort that I'm not the only one who sees how detrimental it is for A.I. to be usurping humans and human art(the only kind of art that can be). I'm pro human.

Don't call it art then if you are of the opinion that only humans can create art. Problem solved. If AI can create something we humans can enjoy, then that is only a positive. It's like enjoying a beautiful vista over the hills of Tuscany. It isn't art, it is nature, but still we enjoy it. Why not take the same approach to whatever AI creates? 

[StrangerInThisTown]

2 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Don't call it art then if you are of the opinion that only humans can create art. Problem solved. If AI can create something we humans can enjoy, then that is only a positive. It's like enjoying a beautiful vista over the hills of Tuscany. It isn't art, it is nature, but still we enjoy it. Why not take the same approach to whatever AI creates? 

Yep. The garbage that is on pop radio was created by actual people but so what, doesn't make it not garbage now does it? Doesn't make me want to go and listen to it. Give me AI created Sinatra any day of the fucking week over any newest Harry Styles track

Edited June 12, 2023 by StrangerInThisTown

[willl]

I'm enjoying seeing the results of AI, some of those 'Aixl Rose' tracks on YT are pretty cool. I listened to the Mr Postman AI Axl cover more than any of the locker leaks.

[SoulMonster]

3 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Problem not solved.

It's not only positive.

A.I. 'art' is nothing like enjoying a beautiful vista in Tuscany or any other place, at all.

Why not just not give a shit and pretend it's all good and of no consequence and surrender to unthinking mental gymnastics? Because I can't. I care too much as a human being and as a creative. Doing that is anti-reality and in my opinion far more negative than bitching about it, even if constantly.

If anyone puts A.I. 'art' near me they run the risk of me deciding to destroy it.

My point was that we humans have the capacity to enjoy things we haven't created ourselves, like nature. Why can't you accept the same for AI? If it is good, then it is good. If you don't think it is okay, then no problem. You seem so angry about it 

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, Oldest Goat said:

I understand your point it's just not a very good one. It doesn't even acknowledge all the elements of the situation, let alone solve it.

What elements are not acknowledged? 

To me this is extremely simple: If AI can create something we humans enjoy, then that is great. Sure, there will be individual preferences here. Personally, I will likely never enjoy AI that tries to create music based on artists I like (I will find it phony without the human dimension), but I could probably enjoy AI generated visual "arts" that is not meant to copy a specific artists style, or even instrumental music. So I will enjoy what I enjoy and not care about the stuff I don't care about, just like how I react to arts and everything else in life. Basically, AI will create another opportunity for me to enjoy things, and that is great. I see NO disadvantages whatsoever. 

[El Guapo]

40 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Problem not solved.

It's not only positive.

A.I. 'art' is nothing like enjoying a beautiful vista in Tuscany or any other place, at all.

Why not just not give a shit and pretend it's all good and of no consequence and surrender to unthinking mental gymnastics? Because I can't. I care too much as a human being and as a creative. Doing that is anti-reality and in my opinion far more negative than bitching about it, even if constantly.

If anyone puts A.I. 'art' near me they run the risk of me deciding to destroy it.

I consider it a mockery and desecration of the human condition, mankind as a whole, as well as myself. I don't just want it away from me I want it to not exist even 100,000 years in the future.

So you don't like it?

[SoulMonster]

Just now, Oldest Goat said:

To discuss this further we'd have to delve into philosophical thought and all the literal sociological and psychological impacts that may occur and I don't see the point. I think people get this or just don't.

AI "arts" (I write it like this until we have come up with a new term, with real arts being something we humans have created) can be so very much, from music to visuals to games to even stories, and span the complexity of simple rhythms to complex visuals that aim to recreate nature vistas or complete music even including vocals. At the moment AI algorithms to a large extent copy human artists, so it becomes a bit soulless and contrite, like AI-Axl, obvious attempts at copying something else but without the human component. But in the future AI will likely be just as able to create music and paintings that seem novel, although inspired by human arts but sufficiently different. It might not be able to create true novelty, pure creativity (but one might argue that this is also the case for humans, too). So basically it will appear to be no different than arts created by humans. We can even imagine an entire band created through AI, with individual musicians and even a singer, all existing in the metaverse.

Would people enjoy this? Some would, some wouldn't. Personally, I would likely never enjoy AI-generated music the same way as I enjoy human-created music. I would miss the human component. But as far as visual arts go, I would likely have no problem with it because I consume such arts in a very different way where my enjoyment of it is not connected to the artists, but where I enjoy it entirely disengaged from the artist and the context of how it was created (well, this is only the case for modern visual arts, and not, say, for paintings from the Renaissance). Other people might have no problems enjoying AI-generated "bands". 

Is there any problems to all this? Not that I can see. AI will never replace humans artists because the human dimension will always be unique and mean that human-created arts will always have an audience. Take GN'R as an example, we enjoy that music in the context of the musicians and what we know about them. Without all the backstory we would likely enjoy it somewhat less. Without the musicians we might not have become fans to begin with. Will AI give us more to enjoy? Absolutely. Will some of it be not enjoyed by many? Sure, but this is the case with human arts, too, or nature. So I don't see the problem here. It isn't a danger to us at all. 

 

[SoulMonster]

3 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

As I said I can't really respond to this without delving deeper than I can be bothered.

If/when A.I. reaches the point of attaining true sentience; that's bad lol. Things get even worse. It doesn't simplify things. It ushers in cataclysmic consequences.

Anyone who wants to put on a Apple Vision Pro and stare at A.I. generated vistas disgusts me. You're looking at this as a novelty and not realizing the future implications and the bigger picture.

Sentience? We are not talking about the dangers of AI in general, we are talking about AI "arts". Why do you bring up sentience? 

What are "the future implications and the bigger picture" of people enjoying AI "generated vistas"? 

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, Oldest Goat said:

You started talking about A.I. being more advanced, that they can think and feel enough that they can 'create' new 'art' from scratch. It goes hand in hand there's a lot of overlap.

As I said I don't want to launch into a sprawling conversation but one of the future implications is a sexual tyrannosaurus from New Zealand being compelled to bitch about it on this forum. Is that a future you want to live in, young man?

There is a big difference between discussing the inherent danger of sentient AI and discussing "arts" created by AI. If you cannot distinguish the two and are unable to discuss AI "arts" without making this into some "Skynet - yes or no?" discussion, then I am opting out. 

[SoulMonster]

37 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

You gave a description of what A.I. currently are doing with their so called art - then started talking about A.I. advancing beyond this to a point of fully functional A.I. artists/bands creating new works with a creative process arguably indistinguishable from the human creative process. So, unsurprisingly that's obviously a bit of a segue into them attaining "sentience".

No, it isn't. AI could absolutely create music that seems novel, like having been programmed to understand musical trends and what makes good music "good", without it necessarily being able to feel things and think. These are two very different things. 

Are you able to discuss the merits of AI "arts" without going completely Skynet on us? 

[SoulMonster]

8 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Fuck this. I genuinely can't be bothered discussing this topic or anything else with you.

The bridges are truly burned and every chance I give you, you fail. I don't like you very much. I think you're a rather dumb, pedantic, pseudo-intellectual. You're exceedingly arrogant and clingy/smothering and talking to you is more often than not a joyless grating slog. A tedious chore. I'm simply not interested. I do not enjoy it.

You're obsessed with me and pushing my buttons. It's really pathetic and it has been going on for a long time now.

I want it to stop. Can this be our last interaction? Just don't talk to or about me. Let us part ways. I have tried very hard to be tolerant, I'm done.

And back to insults. Wow.

You know, there is an ignore function, both in your brain and at this forum. If you can't stand being challenged on your opinions by me, why not use either of those? 

[SoulMonster]

2 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

It's not about me not wanting my opinions challenged. I know that's one of the things you like to spread about me but it's really not the case.

I've put you on ignore before and even then it doesn't stop you from compulsively talking to me or about me.

Listen to me. I don't give a flying fuck if you're technically allowed to obsess over me. I am asking you grown man to grown man. Can we please just cease talking to or about each other and just part ways?

You are a great guy but you have to overcome this unhealthy relationship you have with me. This is a public discussion forum. You sort of accept having your posts challenged when posting here. If you post something I think is wrong or share an opinion that I believe is ill-informed, then I am likely to post my views on that. You can either ignore that, and that ends that discussion effectively, or choose to respond. The choice lies with you. If you are so upset by simply seeing me respond to you that you start acting childish with insults, then it is probably better to put me on ignore so you won't see my posts (but I will of course continue to respond to your posts if I think that is necessary). 

[SoulMonster]

4 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Axl is right to not come here.

The fact that as a grown man you just go "Hehe I'm allowed so there." and you insist on talking to or about me even though you know I want you to stop speaks volumes about what an internet dwelling piece of shit you are.

Look, I am not interested in making this into another bizarre discussion on you and me. You have to get over it. If you are not interested in discussing your problems with AI-generated art, as opposed to AI in general, then there is nothing more to discuss, is there? Anything else you want to say about me can be done in private, or ideally with your therapist.