I am a musician and i spend hours every day making music.

Just this morning i read the thread about the new music generator AI.

TBH the AI will make a lot of stuff, but it will also NOT MAKE THE STUFF I'M MAKING.

Can it be better? Yes, but who cares? I have my own personal creative needs that need to be tended to.

Besides, every creation is unique, you like it or not, every art piece is unique and the AI is coming to add to that, at least in my view, and expand art in ways we never thought possible.

As an AI enthusiast, I'm more than thrilled.

As an artist that doesnt give a fuck about mainstream and money, I am more than thrilled.

I CANT FUCKING WAIT FOR AI DJS PLAYING ON UNDERGROUND RAVES.

AI RAPPERS RHYMING ABOUT NON-PHYSICAL EXISTENCE.

AI SHREDING ABSTRACT GUITARS.

INVENTING NEW INSTRUMENTS.

NEW MELODIES, NEW FUCKING MUSIC THEORY.

CAN SOMEONE IMAGINE SOMETHING MORE DISRUPTIVE THAN THIS?

What does an artist want if not disruption of the status quo? I see a lot of people who learned how to draw and think they're artists. These are the ones complaining about AI taking over.

I'm just fucking excited because before loving to make art, I love art, and I just wanna see what kind of over-human shit AI will come up with.

Imo the hand drawn art would have much meaning and we would love the imperfections of human

I get paid to be creative. If you're doing it to make money, you're probably gonna be fucked. I don't see a huge chunk of the positions I work with rn being around in ten years. You should always do it though, you never know when someone with more money than sense finds its and offers to buy your soul. But it wont make anyone rich in the future. More importantly it helps you stay in touch with yourself and those around you, art will hopefully become more about means of communication than commercialization.

I appreciate and respect art that was created more by hand than by a computer mushing other paintings together

Have you ever heard of atomic assemblers? They're advanced 3D printers that print in any element at an atomic scale. Ribosomes are a natural example of an atomic assembler that produces only proteins. The difference is that our atomic assemblers will be microscopic robots that can work with any element.

Imagine you had a home atomic assembler. It would be capable of making anything you need to survive, given access to raw atoms and electricity. It could make food, clothes, your house, solar panels, batteries, medicine, and even copies of itself.

That is what a post scarcity world looks like. There's no point to hoarding resources when a shovel full of dirt + the air around you contains all the atoms you'd need to make almost anything to could want. Nothing goes to waste because atomic assemblers also offer the possibility of disassembly making perfect recycling a possibility.

Even land would no longer in short supply. A person with an atomic assembler could build a life of luxury anywhere, even on marginal land that today is considered worthless. No need for infrastructure, access to water, employment or anything we need today.

Working in marketing, I’ve already witnessed numerous agencies using AI to create variations of graphics and copy for A&B testing. However, this type of creative work is and has been fairly soulless to begin with.

I primarily work in the video production side of marketing. I’m certain product videos will be one of the first areas to go. When AI can generate millions of variations of your product in various settings, colors, etc then there’s absolutely no need for a human to perform these tasks.

With that being said, the area I believe will be difficult for AI to fully replace will be storytelling that’s unpredictable. I work with many nonprofits creating mini documentaries for fundraising purposes. A lot of companies do this but many fail to create an emotional connection with the audience. The amount of time we spend building trust with our subject to get the best presentation of their story is critical. We then plan ways to create opportunities for emotional sequences to unfold. This could be presenting the subject with a physical newspaper featuring their story, visiting a loved one’s grave, walking through a vacated building they experienced homelessness, etc. We go into these settings understanding they could give us genuine emotions to capture but there’s an element of improv where a lot of the magic happens that we just can’t predict beforehand.

Will AI be able to have this same level of understanding and personal connection to a subject? I find it difficult to believe we’ll see this anytime soon as it requires humans to reach a level of comfort with AI to open up. And even if this is achieved, how is a director of marketing for a nonprofit going to understand how to prompt an AI on these intricate and sensitive details when they can’t even craft these stories on paper without the help of someone like myself before AI?

The way I see it is humans enjoy experiencing the little quirks and details that make us humans.

It’s similar to how Pizza Hut can make a pizza in 10 minutes at any of their franchises around the world, for a fraction of the cost, that’s good enough but yet when given the choice many people will prefer to eat at the local pizza joint where pizzas are handcrafted by a family that’s been doing it for 50 years. There’s totally a market for both but as humans we place value on doing things the more personal and at times difficult way.

Art has always existed alongside humanity, its a form of expression in my opinion and i think it is slightly below writing and will forever stay with humans. Will art in its current form change and render many artists obsolete? yes, but there will always be humans want to express themselves artistically and other humans who want to engage as we are social creatures.

My advice is to use AI to vastly increase your workflow and become more creative, only an artist will best know how to creatively use the new AI that's coming out, after all gold will float to the top and shit will drown. This is coming from an 3D modelling hobbyist who uses ai to increase my speed

I’m starting to believe this is all coming from the right wing media as a way to fear monger. 🙄

How much faith do you have in your ability to generate worthwhile ideas and concepts? What is your ideal market and what do you believe people or companies will pay big money for in the future? I do think digital art is largely not worth it if you're hoping to make a living on sheer technical proficiency. If that window hasn't already closed, it will very soon.

How the art is created will be immaterial if you have faith in your mind's eye and your ability to conjure the things you envision. That's kind of what art has always been and what it will remain. You could even do this for other people. Until AI is so good that it can cut out all the back and forth and faithfully produce what the customer desires on the first try there will always be people impatient enough to commission work from other humans. And even if it gets there, still no one's going to take away your ability to create novel and thought-provoking work.

You probably need to have something valuable to say, because there won't be value in having a pretty way of saying something. I don't know about you, but I don't see much evidence of AI encroaching on the former quite yet. And when it does we're all fucked.

The market will be crowded and you'll need to stand out in some way to make a living, but there aren't many fallbacks where this won't be true, especially in the creative sphere.

And if you find this kind of stuff disturbing to a point where it fucks with your daily life, come talk about it with the other nutballs in r/MAGICD.

I really appreciate this high quality post. Especially the margin comparison of SaaS vs AI companies.

We had like 3 before this paper. I thought it was subsiding ngl.

Saying that Human art is dead is like saying horses should be extinct because we have cars. On a fundamental level they really have nothing to do with each other. Another example is saying we shouldn’t need skilled carpenters because we can 3D print houses or use prefabricated manufacturing.

Now, in terms of going in to art as a professional career to sustain a family and make a living… that’s really no different than trying to become a professional athlete or a movie star. The passion (and at times connections and genetics) needs to be there.

Your professional work doesn’t have to be something that you “love” or even feel passionate about. In fact I’d argue it makes it easier to disconnect from work if you’re not passionate about it. Keep art as a hobby if you’re passionate about it.

AI hype train is full steam right now and given how long technology has taken to proliferate globally (iPhone I would say has only in the past few years reached full saturation) AI will still need to be adopted and used by all the humans that first need to find a killer app for it. Right now it’s shaping up to be the next level up in google search / an incredible digital assistant. Amplifying productivity and capabilities of professionals in multiple fields. AI won’t take a job today; AI + a human most definitely will start to.

Long story short, it’s way early and you’re young. Think more on what you would actually see yourself doing for the next 5 years. Adapt to the world accordingly after that time assuming anything has truly changed.

Because they like watching humans do them. The process doesn’t really matter when it comes to looking at art for most people, it’s the finished product that’s the point

I used to be a toll booth collector before my job was automated. But I wasn't going to let that stop me doing what I loved. So I bought a few acres out in the country and built a little toll booth for myself and now I just sit in it everyday reading a magazine and smoking cigarettes and every now and then I push the button to open the gate to let through imaginary cars and buses.

So take it from me just because technology has replaced you doesn't mean you can't still find satisfaction doing what you where put on this Earth to do.

No, not everything painters could do was automated, you do not understand painting. It’s capable of levels of abstraction and subtle modes of expression that photography (even photo editing) isn’t, while photography is capable of capturing life in perfect detail. This is why both have survived. They’re inherently different and most importantly they’re both done by humans. Painters weren’t having their jobs being taken over by robot photographers who worked for free. I am so tired of having to debunk this comparison over and over again

[deleted]

i dont think the hive mind will be quite the way it is traditionally imagined with simultaneous telepathy.

rather, i think it will be based instead on an extreme speedup in the speed at which communication and thought is possible combined with the ability to share chunks of not just thought, but "brain", the programming that produces the thoughts, between one another. Also things like conflict free datatypes, and the ability to explictly select between handshake forms of communication like TCP and broadcast forms like UDP (which humans switch between the two but in humans you can only guess/infer if your counterparty is using one or the other, but in machines its a lot more explicit)

all that stuff is probably sufficient to produce enough consensus or coordination that machine enabled intelligence could resemble fictional hive minds, but every element with sufficient capabilities would be capable of just as much or possibly even more privacy than an individual human has thanks to cryptography.

at latencies below human thought there might be substantial disagreement or argument.

Thank you! I am glad to have you aboard!

Imagine being in a hive mind with Redditors.

... I'll pass.

I've been haning around this subreddit and make music; techno, ambient, electro, etc.

Its funny, because if you go back and listen to some early techno and the like, there was always little hints of AI and general futurist technology. Techno music is humans trying to sound like machines. Now we have machines trying to sound human.

To answer your question, i think there will be general split. Some people simply wont care, and music is music, whether it is AI/machine generated or human made. On the other hand, you'll have people who have a hard "no" on all music generated from AI. There is likely a sliding scale to that, like i'm not quite sure if AI could accurately capture the pain expressed in blues or the nimble improv and soul of jazz.

You can match and learn how to mirror vocal inflection or the small techniques that a jazz artist might have but i think ability to recognize human spirit in certain types of music, like rock, blues, jazz, soul, etc.

Personally, i think we should be moving AI towards genres like techno, house, Ambient, etc. I'd love to have a techno jam with an AI buddy that looks like BMO from Adventure Time.

As for becoming a professional artist...i think its better in any scenario to get a good day job that can afford you to have fun with it in your free time rather than explicitly going into it.

The only caveat to that is that the art/media industries will still need artists in the loop to direct the projects or vet the products made by AI. The industry will simply need less of them.

The commission market that isn't based on reputation will also likely fall.

The "no job is safe" is true, but it will take some time and truly never fully materialize until something like AGI and post scarcity. So not anytime soon

Now none of that should discourage someone from making art for themselves.

Thank! I really appreciate it!
Glad you are finding value in the post.

They might. Imho, they do not think OpenAI is close to AGI. However, their tools will become more powerful in the future.

Definitely, eventually things will all have weights, as far as i know (using tesla as an example since they've taken this the furthest) they do object detection to find pedestrians or cars for that matter. Taking it further and adding weights to the object and then further into damage prediction would be a great way to extend that.

However I'm not sure what advantage it would have if AI driven cars' accident rate falls so low that collisions are rare, outside of weighting human/human carrying things vs property.

If Microsoft is convinced that OpenAI is well on their way to AGI I wonder why they’d make a deal that caps their profit to “only” $150b. That’s only twice the profit they made last year…and at $13b invested that’s a high risk for a maximum 10x’er. Usually venture investing is looking for 100x + returns.

I’m guessing they intend to further develop the relationship and renegotiate terms in the event that OpenAI really does create AGI