I noticed that AI posts tend to get reported so I figured maybe we just make them officially disallowed.

Agree/disagree? Post and tell us why!

  • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Allow AI posts if they are one of the following :

    • something interesting that can’t be achieved through traditional means
    • something that is created in direct lineage of the programmer’s work (eg : someone builds a specific AI based system to actually make music in a novel way, like, idk, taking in barcodes and generating music based on the data in the barcode)
    • something that is made through a custom workflow that took effort on the technician’s part.
    • Anything that is procedurally generated as part of a semi-determenistic system (eg : sheep in minecraft pressing buttons by accident , sound of twitter)

    Technically, you might need to ban the song “skullgrid” since it was composed using procedural generation software. But, it was composed that way, but then recorded by metal musicians. https://beholdthearctopus.bandcamp.com/track/skullgrid

    Obviously, yes, ban slop AI stuff that’s “here’s enter sandman regge style” , here’s my “smoky blues space album” that’s just them putting the title into suno AI.

    There are also people that worked on this kind of stuff before the AI … mainstreamisation? Like Dadabots , who worked with the musicians and with their permission and everything. I don’t want that kind of stuff to be banned. https://dadabots.bandcamp.com/album/coditany-of-timeness is from 2017 and it would be a shame to lump it in with everything else.

    https://github.com/MeltwaterArchive/Sound-of-Twitter … which is currently down, or deleted or fucking whatever.

    Basically : I want to see experimental works that were made using programming and data re-interpretation. I don’t want to see “I put farts through AI and here’s the generic output”.

    • Hawke@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I think you’re conflating “AI” (LLM) with procedural generation. The former should be banned, the latter allowed.

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Kinda? I know what the difference between LLMs and proc gen is. I don’t think that it will be clear if a ban comes into place, and people are so knee-jerk at anything that isn’t 100% human made that they will care and demand anything that uses any kind of artificial intelligence or non human composed and played music be burned at the stake.

        Also, I think that LLM based generation is a subcategory of proc gen. I think LLM based stuff *can* be set up in non slop ways to create non slop work, and I want the “experimental” high effort LLM stuff to be treated as such.

    • Sunforged@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I feel like you’re making valid points for interesting use of the technology. The problem is that only accounts for such a small percentage of AI output, that it is impossible to moderate for. It takes someone very skilled with the tech to be able to achieve what you are describing. I also don’t think anyone is going to nitpick over someone performing a song written by AI as the artists performance is the human element we identify with.

      Ban AI here and there can be another community for that kind of content.

      • BarbedDentalFloss@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I agree that we should start with a ban all AI content. But we could easily make exceptions for actual effortposts like those listed in the parent comment. It’s not a huge leap. AI slop? Banned. Novelty from someone who used a tool that included AI? Well its not really slop, so don’t ban it.

      • Ludicrous0251@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I disagree, it’s not that hard to moderate. Lemmy is not a legal system, if a mod mistake happens no one gets hurt. Appeals are easy, and you can specify in the rules that AI content must come with a disclaimer and description of why its OK if it wants to stay, otherwise it gets banned with everything else AI.

        For the 0.1% “OK” AI songs mods just have to stop and read a sentence description, its not an overwhelming burden for something that maybe comes through once a month.

    • rudyharrelson@lemmy.radio
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Technically, you might need to ban the song “skullgrid” since it was composed using procedural generation software

      Was the procedural generation software trained using other artists’ works? Or is it more like a drum machine with baked-in algorithms written by software developers? If the latter, that’s not “AI” in the sense that this thread is primarily discussing.

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Or is it more like a drum machine with baked-in algorithms written by software developers?

        even better, using a scripting language that calls algorithms.

        EDIT : Fair point though

    • nublug@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      colloquially we all know ‘ai’ means generative large language models like gpt and copilot. nobody says ‘ai’ these days - especially in the context of question of the post here - and means sythesizers or minecraft or purpose-built and tailored narrowly scoped machine learning models integrated in software. we would say these other terms we’ve used here just like we have.