AI on Wikiloops a no-go?
SUPPORTER
Posts: 127
Joined: 23 juil. 2013
Romura wrote:
To AI or not to AI on Wikiloops, that is the question. Because there is fear that if we don't ban AI from WL, we will be inundated with AI generated tracks, and everyone will leave because that's not what we signed up for.
First of all, that is a big assumption that everyone seems to take for granted. It could be true, but not necessarily so. It depends on the community and how we communicate with other members.
I read all the previous posts and the way deezee was given honest opinions from other members was cordial and understanding. So the situation was resolved with her. Well, couldn't we do that with others who use AI?
But then there is the fear that WL would be swamped with AI tracks if it's not banned.
If AI is allowed, I think WL should maintain strict standards of disclosure and transparency, meaning when you upload there should be a box where you can check if it is AI generated at all. Also, a list in the description section of all tools used including software, instruments, samples, beat tracks, etc. It would be like a photographers display of a photo where he has the camera brand, lens, aperture and exposure setting. Nowadays, most photos are noted if it is digitally created or manipulated.
Encouraging these standards will draw the right creative people and keep the non-musical, non-creative AI users at bay. Hopefully.
And it would be an honor system. I might be naive to think that would work, but it just might, as the members are international. I know it wouldn't work if limited to certain countries. It all depends on what kind of "country" (community) Wikiloops is.
So, to me AI is okay as long as I know it's AI. It's about transparency.
To AI or not to AI on Wikiloops, that is the question. Because there is fear that if we don't ban AI from WL, we will be inundated with AI generated tracks, and everyone will leave because that's not what we signed up for.
First of all, that is a big assumption that everyone seems to take for granted. It could be true, but not necessarily so. It depends on the community and how we communicate with other members.
I read all the previous posts and the way deezee was given honest opinions from other members was cordial and understanding. So the situation was resolved with her. Well, couldn't we do that with others who use AI?
But then there is the fear that WL would be swamped with AI tracks if it's not banned.
If AI is allowed, I think WL should maintain strict standards of disclosure and transparency, meaning when you upload there should be a box where you can check if it is AI generated at all. Also, a list in the description section of all tools used including software, instruments, samples, beat tracks, etc. It would be like a photographers display of a photo where he has the camera brand, lens, aperture and exposure setting. Nowadays, most photos are noted if it is digitally created or manipulated.
Encouraging these standards will draw the right creative people and keep the non-musical, non-creative AI users at bay. Hopefully.
And it would be an honor system. I might be naive to think that would work, but it just might, as the members are international. I know it wouldn't work if limited to certain countries. It all depends on what kind of "country" (community) Wikiloops is.
So, to me AI is okay as long as I know it's AI. It's about transparency.
The idea of Romura seems great to me, in future editions of the Wikiloops web, if Richard deems it appropriate, a button could be created in the database to announce "AI" if you don't want to hear it in the search engine by simply selecting it, matter resolved! Today I do exactly the same by clicking on styles and instruments in the search engine.
Maybe in a few years we will be able to play AI jams with our instruments and this won't be a problem. In fact, there are already tracks made with Band in a Box, music presets from workstations and automatic keyboards or more or less sophisticated composition systems (cut and paste), that I find excellent for enjoying other musicians and my instruments and they don't cause me any problems.
If we see too much AI here and not enough natural creativity, we can also leave the site, your mouse is the boss!!!
+2
Membre
Posts: 43
Joined: 26 janv. 2015
I accept Dick's decision a lot
also copyrights could be touched
I'm the person to give ideas, everyone has the right to decide on themself, my decision, what I do personally is, to play around with that like I want to, my own right .. pleasure seems healthy to me, no lack of a critical sight, I choose positive inspirement
I also accept other oppinions, that's inspirement, just a law, human rights are to keep, to me it seems Wade, you need gererally velet truth, there is an urge for decisisions, all opinions are to include and hear to my mind, indivudualy & free
humans have a right to survive
I seperate shallow AI results and AI art done by a human, AI art by humans feels ok to me
and so does José
art is self expression
José deeply operates with own programs and AI since years.. isn't that a very talent ? we cannot do that, he can 😉
also copyrights could be touched
I'm the person to give ideas, everyone has the right to decide on themself, my decision, what I do personally is, to play around with that like I want to, my own right .. pleasure seems healthy to me, no lack of a critical sight, I choose positive inspirement
I also accept other oppinions, that's inspirement, just a law, human rights are to keep, to me it seems Wade, you need gererally velet truth, there is an urge for decisisions, all opinions are to include and hear to my mind, indivudualy & free
humans have a right to survive
I seperate shallow AI results and AI art done by a human, AI art by humans feels ok to me
and so does José
art is self expression
José deeply operates with own programs and AI since years.. isn't that a very talent ? we cannot do that, he can 😉
+1
Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 3rd NT1A Bundle
Rode NT1-A Complete Vocal Recording
299 €
iThis widget links to Thomann, our affiliate partner. We may receive a commission when you purchase a product there.
Visit Shop
Membre
Posts: 80
Joined: 24 août 2014
to pick up some thoughts again.
to zedders: playing live drums on the keyboard certainly needs some training.
But in the DAW its more like loading your song and the choose a basic rythm and it will adept also using some sort of intelligent quantization.
So no big knowledge is need to do that.
For me its also not the fact that people use this or AI or whatever, but all the distrust
, jealousy that causes.
I have been using these midi drums from toontrack for many years now..
To me I like it more than the sounds coming out of drum module, but since i have always only used this to trigger my drum pads, it never really felt like cheating.
Maybe even causing to post recordings that worse than they actually could... people will distrust this anyhow :-).
So that the other musicians now get in a similar situation somehow makes me smile :-).
I remember when I started recording something with ez drummer, some remix of a drumless version of a Chili Peppers song. I posted this on a drummer forum where many people posted this kind of stuff and the reaction was like - "hey, pretty good ,....but post a video mate"
Here as a user I always been treated like "okay, this guy is slightly stupid" which I probably am, well personally i already feel like cheating if I play to a click. Of course that will also not make things sound better.
Well, many have to learn that they are replacable. Others like the players that have really learned to play their instruments and have found their signature sound in voice or instruments probably do not have to care so much about this development.
A backing track is always just a backing track.
Just like the click from a drum only with pitched tones.
So apart from the aspect of whats legal anything could be used, just if that will bring a lot of satisfaction to the person using that...I don't know
If I try to create a track or do it step time writing, this all is seems a hard effort to me
( Just too stupid maybe ) , but adding a drum or bass , playing it live thats what I love.
For me it's just sort of enjoying the moment ..., thinking about all the rest causes headaches. I like to play a lot but do not record anything !!
to zedders: playing live drums on the keyboard certainly needs some training.
But in the DAW its more like loading your song and the choose a basic rythm and it will adept also using some sort of intelligent quantization.
So no big knowledge is need to do that.
For me its also not the fact that people use this or AI or whatever, but all the distrust
, jealousy that causes.
I have been using these midi drums from toontrack for many years now..
To me I like it more than the sounds coming out of drum module, but since i have always only used this to trigger my drum pads, it never really felt like cheating.
Maybe even causing to post recordings that worse than they actually could... people will distrust this anyhow :-).
So that the other musicians now get in a similar situation somehow makes me smile :-).
I remember when I started recording something with ez drummer, some remix of a drumless version of a Chili Peppers song. I posted this on a drummer forum where many people posted this kind of stuff and the reaction was like - "hey, pretty good ,....but post a video mate"
Here as a user I always been treated like "okay, this guy is slightly stupid" which I probably am, well personally i already feel like cheating if I play to a click. Of course that will also not make things sound better.
Well, many have to learn that they are replacable. Others like the players that have really learned to play their instruments and have found their signature sound in voice or instruments probably do not have to care so much about this development.
A backing track is always just a backing track.
Just like the click from a drum only with pitched tones.
So apart from the aspect of whats legal anything could be used, just if that will bring a lot of satisfaction to the person using that...I don't know
If I try to create a track or do it step time writing, this all is seems a hard effort to me
( Just too stupid maybe ) , but adding a drum or bass , playing it live thats what I love.
For me it's just sort of enjoying the moment ..., thinking about all the rest causes headaches. I like to play a lot but do not record anything !!
+2
SUPPORTER
Posts: 88
Joined: 23 août 2021
Deal with it as it happens. Fear usually amounts to fantasy. If a flood of new members arrive and dilute this place then the additional revenue involved will allow for new solutions to manage it. Quite frankly I don’t see that happening. Go checkout BandLab to see what a free site enables /encourages. What would motivate someone to pay to be on WL just to put AI stuff out there?
Then again what do I know.
Maybe someday WL will have random button that creates raw simple templates to spark muses.
Then as we die off each one of us can have a AI instance interject tracks using our playing into the mix.
Who really knows.
We’re still beating sticks on cave walls.
What makes WL so good is that it’s a wonderful idea held by a group of very nice people. That will continue I believe regardless of technology.
Then again what do I know.
Maybe someday WL will have random button that creates raw simple templates to spark muses.
Then as we die off each one of us can have a AI instance interject tracks using our playing into the mix.
Who really knows.
We’re still beating sticks on cave walls.
What makes WL so good is that it’s a wonderful idea held by a group of very nice people. That will continue I believe regardless of technology.
+9
SUPPORTER
Posts: 381
Joined: 27 févr. 2016
Somebody, probably Thomas wrote:
AI on Wikiloops a no-go?
AI on Wikiloops a no-go?
Sure is, AI is DOA here ... definite no go! :D
+1
Membre
Posts: 2
Joined: 1 avr. 2014
With this AI thing spreading to all the arts, there is going to be pushback technology. And it's here, such as Pex.com and Discovery. A way to spot AI generated art and music.
https://pex.com/blog/real-or-fake-identifying-ai-generated-music-and-voices/
So if we can't actually ban it, that's up to Richard the owner. But we, as members can discourage it and make it uncomfortable for those who use AI in a non-creative way, that is, as a standalone "push the button and create music" mode. This way we can still keep those members like deezee who use AI very creatively. But again, disclosure and transparency is paramount. AI users must explicitly tell us how the AI was used when it is uploaded.
What will happen, after AI becomes ridiculously popular is that it will go out of fashion. Just like we have sugar free and caffeine free products, we will have AI free music, signifying a higher level of artistry. People with real skills and talent will refuse to be identified with AI at all. There will be more appreciation of non-AI music from people who appreciate true art. The truly creative artists must up their level of work so that it is way beyond what AI can create. Having had this thought, I asked myself, would it have been possible for an AI to have created my works? So, I reprised my original music and art and I can say that no AI could have created my works.
Great art is great, it doesn't matter how or who created it. I have yet to see any works of art by an AI that is truly great. It it happens, and if I agree that it is great, I will clap my hands. But this has deeper implications of what it means to be human. If a robot can create great works of art, that robot is no longer a robot. We have created a person.
So until we have created such a robot, I think of AI music as a microwaveable frozen dinner. Convenient but not very tasty and not good for you. Fresh cooked is always the best! Food or music. TV dinners were all the rage when it came out. Now we look upon them with disdain and even loathing. In the long run, organic foods are more popular now because of people eating too much frozen and processed foods.
So is WL about cooking fresh or about tv dinners? Let's stay freshly cooked! But not with any official bans. We can do this in a pleasant way without autocratic rules. And here's how we can start. From now on, when I upload, I am going to put in the description, TOTALLY A.I. FREE! I GUARANTEE THAT THERE IS NO PART OF MY TRACK THAT WAS GENERATED BY AN AI. There will be some people who will lie, but using new tech like Pex.com, we can expose them if it bothers you. 'Nuff said. Keep on making good music!
https://pex.com/blog/real-or-fake-identifying-ai-generated-music-and-voices/
So if we can't actually ban it, that's up to Richard the owner. But we, as members can discourage it and make it uncomfortable for those who use AI in a non-creative way, that is, as a standalone "push the button and create music" mode. This way we can still keep those members like deezee who use AI very creatively. But again, disclosure and transparency is paramount. AI users must explicitly tell us how the AI was used when it is uploaded.
What will happen, after AI becomes ridiculously popular is that it will go out of fashion. Just like we have sugar free and caffeine free products, we will have AI free music, signifying a higher level of artistry. People with real skills and talent will refuse to be identified with AI at all. There will be more appreciation of non-AI music from people who appreciate true art. The truly creative artists must up their level of work so that it is way beyond what AI can create. Having had this thought, I asked myself, would it have been possible for an AI to have created my works? So, I reprised my original music and art and I can say that no AI could have created my works.
Great art is great, it doesn't matter how or who created it. I have yet to see any works of art by an AI that is truly great. It it happens, and if I agree that it is great, I will clap my hands. But this has deeper implications of what it means to be human. If a robot can create great works of art, that robot is no longer a robot. We have created a person.
So until we have created such a robot, I think of AI music as a microwaveable frozen dinner. Convenient but not very tasty and not good for you. Fresh cooked is always the best! Food or music. TV dinners were all the rage when it came out. Now we look upon them with disdain and even loathing. In the long run, organic foods are more popular now because of people eating too much frozen and processed foods.
So is WL about cooking fresh or about tv dinners? Let's stay freshly cooked! But not with any official bans. We can do this in a pleasant way without autocratic rules. And here's how we can start. From now on, when I upload, I am going to put in the description, TOTALLY A.I. FREE! I GUARANTEE THAT THERE IS NO PART OF MY TRACK THAT WAS GENERATED BY AN AI. There will be some people who will lie, but using new tech like Pex.com, we can expose them if it bothers you. 'Nuff said. Keep on making good music!
+4
SUPPORTER
Posts: 200
Joined: 18 janv. 2024
Uh oh, the controversy continues to agitate authorized circles on WikiLoops: I hope there will be no witch trials or excommunication!
This AI debate started with someone feeling offended to discover that the voice they were dreaming about isn't entirely natural.
He asks that the use of technological means be clearly indicated and that is an excellent idea!
If the community and its manager agree, it should just be indicated whether the instrument(s) used on a track are digital or not.
Technically it's quite simple to do by modifying the drop-down menu that appears when uploading a track to WikiLoops.
To do this, it may be necessary to rework the structure of the database a little by adding a Boolean field somewhere. Nothing fancy.
The comments made lead us to believe that the real subject may be elsewhere.
This reminds me of the quarrel between the Ancients and the Moderns in the world of Art in Europe at a certain time in Europe. There was a time when works that perfectly met academic criteria could not be considered truly artistic.
We know well that this does not hold water: Andy's Maryline is in the eyes of the public - the only judge in the matter - as artistic as Leonardo's Mona Lisa.
Arthur Rimbaud is as immense as Victor Hugo or Rabelais.
Isn't James Cameron's film Avatar as good as a Charlie Chaplin film?
Is techno music non-music? And is street art really pictorial?
In short, what does it matter if a work is of artisanal or digital origin, as long as it thrills us?
A good old dry guitar can always bring as much joy as the most sophisticated plugins.
This AI debate started with someone feeling offended to discover that the voice they were dreaming about isn't entirely natural.
He asks that the use of technological means be clearly indicated and that is an excellent idea!
If the community and its manager agree, it should just be indicated whether the instrument(s) used on a track are digital or not.
Technically it's quite simple to do by modifying the drop-down menu that appears when uploading a track to WikiLoops.
To do this, it may be necessary to rework the structure of the database a little by adding a Boolean field somewhere. Nothing fancy.
The comments made lead us to believe that the real subject may be elsewhere.
This reminds me of the quarrel between the Ancients and the Moderns in the world of Art in Europe at a certain time in Europe. There was a time when works that perfectly met academic criteria could not be considered truly artistic.
We know well that this does not hold water: Andy's Maryline is in the eyes of the public - the only judge in the matter - as artistic as Leonardo's Mona Lisa.
Arthur Rimbaud is as immense as Victor Hugo or Rabelais.
Isn't James Cameron's film Avatar as good as a Charlie Chaplin film?
Is techno music non-music? And is street art really pictorial?
In short, what does it matter if a work is of artisanal or digital origin, as long as it thrills us?
A good old dry guitar can always bring as much joy as the most sophisticated plugins.
+2
SUPPORTER
Posts: 533
Joined: 25 nov. 2013
Once again the point is being missed. Just asking everybody nicely to ID whether they used AI can still mean an avalanche of tracks here and potentially an enormous amount of someone's time moderating and getting rid of tracks where there has been nothing human influenced. An example was given way back in this discussion of a member who wanted her lyrics sung and all the music to go with it. So when hearing this it sounds and is 100% AI. So how does this get scrutinized? Who is going to listen to 100s of tracks a day to judge whether they think someone wrote the lyrics or not?
Is anyone here so naive to think we won't have people who will try to swamp this place with AI tracks? It has happened twice before with "taggers". They didn't even have AI as a tool but were posting relatively large numbers of tracks. They were easy to identify because they just downloaded and reposted tracks with their name on it. Now, if AI is here they will be indistinguishable and potentially even more prolific.
I've still not heard any of the AI proponents offer the $$ for changes or to work up to full time as a moderator sorting out what opening the AI flood gates could mean. Sorry but that's not a very good attitude to just think everyone else should pay for and clean up what's likely to become an unnecessary mess.
When someone suggests that something is easy, like just relaxing and letting AI happen, or that everyone out there will be honest, they are either not being honest or wearing very thick rose colored glasses. You think it's easy? Put up a very large amount of money to pay for someone's time to clean up the mess that's likely. You may also wish to accept that many of the people here who just want to play with other real musicians may disappear.
That leaves this site as just another repository for banal AI tracks.
Bravo! Join the big music companies who also wish to never hire or pay for writers or musicians. Bland is fine with them since they control all the media and will just make more $$ by not supporting artists. This is not like other technological improvements, it's a total replacement of people in the arts. If you wish to endorse this in order to play with the new toy, you are stepping up as part of the problem.
This is a site about musicians who make choices in the compositions and sounds that become music. We share our efforts and sometimes ask others to fill in the stuff we can't do. This is not the same as asking a computer to compose, play and make those artistic decisions. It's not a musician's tool. It's designed to be any idiot's tool. You can push a button, engage your ego, and think now I'm a musician! How many wannabee musicians are out there? One million? 200 million?
Think People, Think!
Is anyone here so naive to think we won't have people who will try to swamp this place with AI tracks? It has happened twice before with "taggers". They didn't even have AI as a tool but were posting relatively large numbers of tracks. They were easy to identify because they just downloaded and reposted tracks with their name on it. Now, if AI is here they will be indistinguishable and potentially even more prolific.
I've still not heard any of the AI proponents offer the $$ for changes or to work up to full time as a moderator sorting out what opening the AI flood gates could mean. Sorry but that's not a very good attitude to just think everyone else should pay for and clean up what's likely to become an unnecessary mess.
When someone suggests that something is easy, like just relaxing and letting AI happen, or that everyone out there will be honest, they are either not being honest or wearing very thick rose colored glasses. You think it's easy? Put up a very large amount of money to pay for someone's time to clean up the mess that's likely. You may also wish to accept that many of the people here who just want to play with other real musicians may disappear.
That leaves this site as just another repository for banal AI tracks.
Bravo! Join the big music companies who also wish to never hire or pay for writers or musicians. Bland is fine with them since they control all the media and will just make more $$ by not supporting artists. This is not like other technological improvements, it's a total replacement of people in the arts. If you wish to endorse this in order to play with the new toy, you are stepping up as part of the problem.
This is a site about musicians who make choices in the compositions and sounds that become music. We share our efforts and sometimes ask others to fill in the stuff we can't do. This is not the same as asking a computer to compose, play and make those artistic decisions. It's not a musician's tool. It's designed to be any idiot's tool. You can push a button, engage your ego, and think now I'm a musician! How many wannabee musicians are out there? One million? 200 million?
Think People, Think!
+4
Harley Benton G112 Celestion V30
Cabinet for Electric Guitar
169 €
iThis widget links to Thomann, our affiliate partner. We may receive a commission when you purchase a product there.
Visit Shop
Membre
Posts: 26
Joined: 20 nov. 2014
Well said Wade. AI use here is just another, lazier, more automated form of plagiarism in the sense that people will take credit for art that is not of their making. Give me honest mediocrity any day.
https://www.wikiloops.com/backingtrack-jam-49113
https://www.wikiloops.com/backingtrack-jam-49113
+2
SUPPORTER
Posts: 311
Joined: 19 mars 2022
(I said I wouldn`t participate further in this thread, so you must be hallucinating reading this)
Please, everybody, stay calm and civil. This shouldn`t turn into a “mine`s bigger than yours” (e.g. I use less plugins than you, therefore I am less AI than you) discussion and [insert deity of your choice here] forbid, we should not at all be talking about banning people.
When I started this thread, it was about my issues with AI-generated music in general and not about trying to initiate changes to Wikiloops (which I couldn`t and wouldn`t do in any case. Even as a supporting member I still see myself as a guest here).
I`ve found all of your comments helpful in better understanding my own thoughts, so thank you for that.
As I don`t want to repeat my earlier comments, here are some additional thoughts and take-aways from this thread:
Using plugins, controllers and vsts has nothing to do with AI. Bradford with his wind controllers is a great musician who makes a conscious decision on what to play and how. The impaired drummer in the zedders video is making music. Humans are creating – to me, it`s this simple fact that draws the line between AI and non-AI. And this is mutually exclusive.
@Didier: You wrote: “This AI debate started with someone feeling offended to discover that the voice they were dreaming about isn't entirely natural.”
Sorry, but you`re wrong.
A) The voice was entirely unnatural as it was 100% machine-generated.
B) I felt offended by noticing how easily I could be fooled (even though Dorothy had made it clear that the vocals were AI-generated. No deception on her (push) part, extreme self-deception on my (pull) part.)
What AKchen and José are doing (or planning to do) with AI may be something different altogether. Taking bits and pieces of AI-generated elements and combining and re-arranging them to create something altogether new sounds like a creative artform to me.
Whether the result is something that I might like to add to or simply appreciate for its creativity is irrelevant. The end result is still created by humans and is based on their “sound-design” decisions.
Using AI tools in mixing and mastering processes – why not? Over time I expect that the results may become uniform and boring but that`s more of a quality issue.
I think I found a common thread across all comments here and it confirmed to me why WIKILOOPS IS SUCH A GREAT PLACE:
The willingness to be open and honest about what we do. If anyone uses AI to generate templates, just point it out in the comment to your tracks. Despite some of the more forceful arguments here, please don`t think of this as a “coming out”. It`s nothing more than what we usually do when we name the instrument we`ve added to a template. No big deal.
If this were to be a big deal, then any appeal to Dick to create a selection filter for AI or even a separate AI-space on Wikiloops would be meaningless. Either we`re honest or we`re not. The level of system automation and system functionality doesn`t enter into it.
Final thought: Were we to freeze the current membership and mode of conduct, this discussion wouldn`t be necessary. I assume that the 500 or so active musicians are here because of their interest in what Wikiloops is all about. And they became Wikiloop members BEFORE AI started to be relevant. Where I agree with Wade is that this thread (and threat) is much more about the future than the present. And we`re not talking years, we`re talking months.
While this thread may not result in anything concrete, if it has least started you thinking about the topic, great.
I`ll crawl back into my hole now and remember you didn`t read this as I didn`t write this :@
Please, everybody, stay calm and civil. This shouldn`t turn into a “mine`s bigger than yours” (e.g. I use less plugins than you, therefore I am less AI than you) discussion and [insert deity of your choice here] forbid, we should not at all be talking about banning people.
When I started this thread, it was about my issues with AI-generated music in general and not about trying to initiate changes to Wikiloops (which I couldn`t and wouldn`t do in any case. Even as a supporting member I still see myself as a guest here).
I`ve found all of your comments helpful in better understanding my own thoughts, so thank you for that.
As I don`t want to repeat my earlier comments, here are some additional thoughts and take-aways from this thread:
Using plugins, controllers and vsts has nothing to do with AI. Bradford with his wind controllers is a great musician who makes a conscious decision on what to play and how. The impaired drummer in the zedders video is making music. Humans are creating – to me, it`s this simple fact that draws the line between AI and non-AI. And this is mutually exclusive.
@Didier: You wrote: “This AI debate started with someone feeling offended to discover that the voice they were dreaming about isn't entirely natural.”
Sorry, but you`re wrong.
A) The voice was entirely unnatural as it was 100% machine-generated.
B) I felt offended by noticing how easily I could be fooled (even though Dorothy had made it clear that the vocals were AI-generated. No deception on her (push) part, extreme self-deception on my (pull) part.)
What AKchen and José are doing (or planning to do) with AI may be something different altogether. Taking bits and pieces of AI-generated elements and combining and re-arranging them to create something altogether new sounds like a creative artform to me.
Whether the result is something that I might like to add to or simply appreciate for its creativity is irrelevant. The end result is still created by humans and is based on their “sound-design” decisions.
Using AI tools in mixing and mastering processes – why not? Over time I expect that the results may become uniform and boring but that`s more of a quality issue.
I think I found a common thread across all comments here and it confirmed to me why WIKILOOPS IS SUCH A GREAT PLACE:
The willingness to be open and honest about what we do. If anyone uses AI to generate templates, just point it out in the comment to your tracks. Despite some of the more forceful arguments here, please don`t think of this as a “coming out”. It`s nothing more than what we usually do when we name the instrument we`ve added to a template. No big deal.
If this were to be a big deal, then any appeal to Dick to create a selection filter for AI or even a separate AI-space on Wikiloops would be meaningless. Either we`re honest or we`re not. The level of system automation and system functionality doesn`t enter into it.
Final thought: Were we to freeze the current membership and mode of conduct, this discussion wouldn`t be necessary. I assume that the 500 or so active musicians are here because of their interest in what Wikiloops is all about. And they became Wikiloop members BEFORE AI started to be relevant. Where I agree with Wade is that this thread (and threat) is much more about the future than the present. And we`re not talking years, we`re talking months.
While this thread may not result in anything concrete, if it has least started you thinking about the topic, great.
I`ll crawl back into my hole now and remember you didn`t read this as I didn`t write this :@
+2
SUPPORTER
Posts: 2000
Joined: 27 sept. 2014
There is no problem discussing things in a civil and calm manner, I appreciate that you all managed to keep strong emotions out of it - well done guys!! Keep up the interesting discussion, and keep up the Wikiloops spirit ;)
+3
SUPPORTER
Posts: 88
Joined: 2 juil. 2018
Once again the point is being missed. Just asking everybody nicely to ID whether they used AI can still mean an avalanche of tracks here and potentially an enormous amount of someone's time moderating and getting rid of tracks where there has been nothing human influenced. An example was given way back in this discussion of a member who wanted her lyrics sung and all the music to go with it. So when hearing this it sounds and is 100% AI. So how does this get scrutinized? Who is going to listen to 100s of tracks a day to judge whether they think someone wrote the lyrics or not?
What you talking about Wade.....
Quote
An example was given way back in this discussion of a member who wanted her lyrics sung and all the music to go with it
Is that comment referring to myself ?
What you talking about Wade.....
Quote
An example was given way back in this discussion of a member who wanted her lyrics sung and all the music to go with it
Is that comment referring to myself ?
Harley Benton G112 Celestion V30
Cabinet for Electric Guitar
169 €
iThis widget links to Thomann, our affiliate partner. We may receive a commission when you purchase a product there.
Visit Shop
SUPPORTER
Posts: 902
Joined: 14 févr. 2018
What an interesting discussion... thanks Thomas for starting it (and of course I fell for your original click bait title about marrying or proposing to Shi) :D
About the so-called "AI": I have linked to a post on my own blog lately which I found interesting, please see https://wolfgang.lonien.de/2024/05/an-excellent-comment-on-the-problems-with-the-so-called-artificial-intelligence/ in case you're interested. The short version of that was: "AI" is neither artificial nor intellgent, and it takes up loads of resources like all these servers crunching Bitcoin and other virtual currencies did before. It simply shouldn't be used.
Now I've found another article, this time on TechCrunch, which explains the basics as well, and also the problems for us (our sites like Wikiloops). See https://techcrunch.com/2024/06/01/what-is-ai-how-does-ai-work/?guccounter=1 and let me cite a passage:
> "Last in the training issues is the fact that a great deal, perhaps the vast majority, of training data used to train AI models is basically stolen. Entire websites, portfolios, libraries full of books, papers, transcriptions of conversations — all this was hoovered up by the people who assembled databases like “Common Crawl” and LAION-5B, without asking anyone’s consent."
The article goes on with:
> "That means your art, writing, or likeness may (it’s very likely, in fact) have been used to train an AI. While no one cares if their comment on a news article gets used, authors whose entire books have been used, or illustrators whose distinctive style can now be imitated, potentially have a serious grievance with AI companies. While lawsuits so far have been tentative and fruitless, this particular problem in training data seems to be hurtling towards a showdown."
And yes, people like Scarlett Johansson are less than amused about her voice being used in "AI" products now. And although not everyone here would mind of their voice or tone or licks, riffs, etc. might get stolen, I'm pretty sure that "AI" robots are scanning this page for content, this is what they do. I followed the link to the next TechCrunch article about stolen content, https://techcrunch.com/2022/09/21/who-fed-the-ai/ and the link within to search for images of or from me, and indeed, https://haveibeentrained.com/search/TEXT?search_text=Wolfgang%20Lonien
See here:
[img]https://cdn.cupoftea.social/media_attachments/files/112/552/310/610/408/636/original/84513e3082526416.png[/img]
(put this screenshot onto a Mastodon server to show it here. The first photo of myself was taken by Richard btw, on the Wikiloops members' meeting in 2018)
Now does that mean that we should use "AI" here, as it is using us anyway and for sure? Difficult, and a while ago I wrote in the moderators' and site owner's "sofa" area that I'm glad that this isn't my decision to make.
On one hand I can understand Dorothy who says she can't sing and likes to hear a song how it could sound. On the other hand, and with a bit of thinking, I'm also very close to Wade's opinion that it (I mean "AI") shouldn't have a place here (but without perfoming my role as a moderator to delete anything (yet)).
The rules we have here stand already: with each upload, each of us agrees to upload only own stuff, no covers or work of others at all. But what about "AI"-generated stuff? That's not only "invented" (I prefer "hallucinated") by machines, but those already stole most of their "ideas" from others, probably including ourselves. As such, "AI"-generated content *IS* forbidden already without any need for further owner decisions or anything.
But - like others have written already - we are musicians and creatives, and if we take "AI"-generated output and slice and dice and mix it into something new, than that is a creative process again, so I'd have nothing against that, although I won't spend my time doing that.
Still not finished with my thoughts about it all, but thanks for following so far.
And again, also thanks for a lovely discussion. I know why I'm here <3 (and no, it's not because of a proposal, since I'm married already ;) )
About the so-called "AI": I have linked to a post on my own blog lately which I found interesting, please see https://wolfgang.lonien.de/2024/05/an-excellent-comment-on-the-problems-with-the-so-called-artificial-intelligence/ in case you're interested. The short version of that was: "AI" is neither artificial nor intellgent, and it takes up loads of resources like all these servers crunching Bitcoin and other virtual currencies did before. It simply shouldn't be used.
Now I've found another article, this time on TechCrunch, which explains the basics as well, and also the problems for us (our sites like Wikiloops). See https://techcrunch.com/2024/06/01/what-is-ai-how-does-ai-work/?guccounter=1 and let me cite a passage:
> "Last in the training issues is the fact that a great deal, perhaps the vast majority, of training data used to train AI models is basically stolen. Entire websites, portfolios, libraries full of books, papers, transcriptions of conversations — all this was hoovered up by the people who assembled databases like “Common Crawl” and LAION-5B, without asking anyone’s consent."
The article goes on with:
> "That means your art, writing, or likeness may (it’s very likely, in fact) have been used to train an AI. While no one cares if their comment on a news article gets used, authors whose entire books have been used, or illustrators whose distinctive style can now be imitated, potentially have a serious grievance with AI companies. While lawsuits so far have been tentative and fruitless, this particular problem in training data seems to be hurtling towards a showdown."
And yes, people like Scarlett Johansson are less than amused about her voice being used in "AI" products now. And although not everyone here would mind of their voice or tone or licks, riffs, etc. might get stolen, I'm pretty sure that "AI" robots are scanning this page for content, this is what they do. I followed the link to the next TechCrunch article about stolen content, https://techcrunch.com/2022/09/21/who-fed-the-ai/ and the link within to search for images of or from me, and indeed, https://haveibeentrained.com/search/TEXT?search_text=Wolfgang%20Lonien
See here:
[img]https://cdn.cupoftea.social/media_attachments/files/112/552/310/610/408/636/original/84513e3082526416.png[/img]
(put this screenshot onto a Mastodon server to show it here. The first photo of myself was taken by Richard btw, on the Wikiloops members' meeting in 2018)
Now does that mean that we should use "AI" here, as it is using us anyway and for sure? Difficult, and a while ago I wrote in the moderators' and site owner's "sofa" area that I'm glad that this isn't my decision to make.
On one hand I can understand Dorothy who says she can't sing and likes to hear a song how it could sound. On the other hand, and with a bit of thinking, I'm also very close to Wade's opinion that it (I mean "AI") shouldn't have a place here (but without perfoming my role as a moderator to delete anything (yet)).
The rules we have here stand already: with each upload, each of us agrees to upload only own stuff, no covers or work of others at all. But what about "AI"-generated stuff? That's not only "invented" (I prefer "hallucinated") by machines, but those already stole most of their "ideas" from others, probably including ourselves. As such, "AI"-generated content *IS* forbidden already without any need for further owner decisions or anything.
But - like others have written already - we are musicians and creatives, and if we take "AI"-generated output and slice and dice and mix it into something new, than that is a creative process again, so I'd have nothing against that, although I won't spend my time doing that.
Still not finished with my thoughts about it all, but thanks for following so far.
And again, also thanks for a lovely discussion. I know why I'm here <3 (and no, it's not because of a proposal, since I'm married already ;) )
+5
Membre
Posts: 26
Joined: 20 nov. 2014
zedders wrote:
I listened too. I thought it sounded like auto=tuned garbage and nothing like Shi other than the timbre was female.
AI is using ridiculous amounts of power in data centres. It's estimated that in 2 years AI will be using as much power as the whole of Japan with 120M people. I read it is using 1/5th of all power in Ireland - official figures, not guesses.
I listened too. I thought it sounded like auto=tuned garbage and nothing like Shi other than the timbre was female.
AI is using ridiculous amounts of power in data centres. It's estimated that in 2 years AI will be using as much power as the whole of Japan with 120M people. I read it is using 1/5th of all power in Ireland - official figures, not guesses.
That explains all the brown outs here!!!
+1
Membre
Posts: 280
Joined: 30 janv. 2021
PaulBOwens wrote:
That explains all the brown outs here!!!
By 2026, due to agreements already in place, it's set to use a whopping 1/3 or Irelands electrical power. At this point one has to wonder if these figures are being massaged by the wind farm lobby.
zedders wrote:
I listened too. I thought it sounded like auto=tuned garbage and nothing like Shi other than the timbre was female.
AI is using ridiculous amounts of power in data centres. It's estimated that in 2 years AI will be using as much power as the whole of Japan with 120M people. I read it is using 1/5th of all power in Ireland - official figures, not guesses.
I listened too. I thought it sounded like auto=tuned garbage and nothing like Shi other than the timbre was female.
AI is using ridiculous amounts of power in data centres. It's estimated that in 2 years AI will be using as much power as the whole of Japan with 120M people. I read it is using 1/5th of all power in Ireland - official figures, not guesses.
That explains all the brown outs here!!!
+1
SUPPORTER
Posts: 182
Joined: 1 janv. 2017
"I want AI to do my laundry an dishes so that I can do art and writing, not for AI to do my art and writing so that I can do my laundry and dishes." (Joanna Maciejewska)
+10
SUPPORTER
Posts: 381
Joined: 27 févr. 2016
hartmut wrote:
"I want AI to do my laundry an dishes so that I can do art and writing, not for AI to do my art and writing so that I can do my laundry and dishes." (Joanna Maciejewska)
"I want AI to do my laundry an dishes so that I can do art and writing, not for AI to do my art and writing so that I can do my laundry and dishes." (Joanna Maciejewska)
Perfect quote!! :D
+2
SUPPORTER
Posts: 533
Joined: 25 nov. 2013
deezee wrote:
Once again the point is being missed. Just asking everybody nicely to ID whether they used AI can still mean an avalanche of tracks here and potentially an enormous amount of someone's time moderating and getting rid of tracks where there has been nothing human influenced. An example was given way back in this discussion of a member who wanted her lyrics sung and all the music to go with it. So when hearing this it sounds and is 100% AI. So how does this get scrutinized? Who is going to listen to 100s of tracks a day to judge whether they think someone wrote the lyrics or not?
What you talking about Wade.....
Quote
An example was given way back in this discussion of a member who wanted her lyrics sung and all the music to go with it
Is that comment referring to myself ?
Once again the point is being missed. Just asking everybody nicely to ID whether they used AI can still mean an avalanche of tracks here and potentially an enormous amount of someone's time moderating and getting rid of tracks where there has been nothing human influenced. An example was given way back in this discussion of a member who wanted her lyrics sung and all the music to go with it. So when hearing this it sounds and is 100% AI. So how does this get scrutinized? Who is going to listen to 100s of tracks a day to judge whether they think someone wrote the lyrics or not?
What you talking about Wade.....
Quote
An example was given way back in this discussion of a member who wanted her lyrics sung and all the music to go with it
Is that comment referring to myself ?
No that tracks was from Mary.
Daddario EXL170
Electric Bass String Set
22,90 €
iThis widget links to Thomann, our affiliate partner. We may receive a commission when you purchase a product there.
Visit Shop
SUPPORTER
Posts: 252
Joined: 24 janv. 2016
Big discussian, many arguments for with or without AI. So at the end we should have direct up to the point statement from Dick and we should follow or just leave. Sorry if there is such statement which i missed. Will appreciate if somebody prompt me for that. B)
SUPPORTER
Posts: 252
Joined: 24 janv. 2016
Ai is not exactly replacement tool.If you do chords progression by your preference on AI and record just main composition and then reckrd your own instruments. But decision should be clear without gray notes and should be followed. Why we are using DAW in this case. Why we using or can use plugins. Should awoid that also, should use just clean instruments and write music on notes pad. What about great software which Wikiloops using. Can Wikiloops be this great tool without technology?
Wade wrote:
AI is designed to be a replacement for musicians and composers. It is not designed as a "helping tool". It may be that some here are trying to think of it and use it that way, however it's (to my mind) impossible to define the level of "help". If it's here at all then it will take a huge amount of someone's time to police this so that we aren't flooded with AI tracks. In one recent case it was the member's lyrics that were used, but what we hear is 100% computer generated band and vocals. How do you distinguish this from someone who only gave AI instructions of "pop tune with sad lyrics 3 minutes long"? They push the go button and have however many songs they want come up ready to post.
Please think about this as All I'm hearing from those that wish to have AI here is how they wish to use it without a thought as to what the consequences might be for the site, or how "limited" use could happen without a huge amount of time for policing this. In the example given the moderator would need to somehow find a way to establish that the member wrote the lyrics first. How do you do that? You could just give your instructions to AI, copy the lyrics they provide, post them on the site, then post the AI track a few days later. If you think this isn't likely or possible think again.
We have had taggers here that just wanted their name on as many tracks as possible. We also have had members who brought copyright material here and posted it as their own. There are potentially millions of people who would like to push a button and have music come out the other end that they put their name to.
AI requires banning as it's impossible for me to see how this can be monitored, and the examples that have already shown up make this obvious. The alternative is for this site to be no different/better than all the other sites that will tolerate AI. If that happens I can guarantee you that many/most will abandon Wikiloops. Someone ( one of us?) will then develop a site that will ban all AI and cater to musicians who wish to continue to work together to make REAL music.
Once again think about this folks. Do you wish to publish your tracks on a site where you may have had some input, but it's really an AI track and whatever that's real about your track is swamped by thousands of AI tracks that are just from button pushers? If you are at heart a musician first, the answer should be obvious.
Krasimir wrote:
Yes all new things should be considered, but with careful review. Any how Al is just helping tool. B)
Yes all new things should be considered, but with careful review. Any how Al is just helping tool. B)
AI is designed to be a replacement for musicians and composers. It is not designed as a "helping tool". It may be that some here are trying to think of it and use it that way, however it's (to my mind) impossible to define the level of "help". If it's here at all then it will take a huge amount of someone's time to police this so that we aren't flooded with AI tracks. In one recent case it was the member's lyrics that were used, but what we hear is 100% computer generated band and vocals. How do you distinguish this from someone who only gave AI instructions of "pop tune with sad lyrics 3 minutes long"? They push the go button and have however many songs they want come up ready to post.
Please think about this as All I'm hearing from those that wish to have AI here is how they wish to use it without a thought as to what the consequences might be for the site, or how "limited" use could happen without a huge amount of time for policing this. In the example given the moderator would need to somehow find a way to establish that the member wrote the lyrics first. How do you do that? You could just give your instructions to AI, copy the lyrics they provide, post them on the site, then post the AI track a few days later. If you think this isn't likely or possible think again.
We have had taggers here that just wanted their name on as many tracks as possible. We also have had members who brought copyright material here and posted it as their own. There are potentially millions of people who would like to push a button and have music come out the other end that they put their name to.
AI requires banning as it's impossible for me to see how this can be monitored, and the examples that have already shown up make this obvious. The alternative is for this site to be no different/better than all the other sites that will tolerate AI. If that happens I can guarantee you that many/most will abandon Wikiloops. Someone ( one of us?) will then develop a site that will ban all AI and cater to musicians who wish to continue to work together to make REAL music.
Once again think about this folks. Do you wish to publish your tracks on a site where you may have had some input, but it's really an AI track and whatever that's real about your track is swamped by thousands of AI tracks that are just from button pushers? If you are at heart a musician first, the answer should be obvious.
+1
wikiloops online jamsessions wird präsentiert mit freundlichem
Support von:
I think that Wikiloops is the dream that every musician had ever... to share ideas and projects, even is a form of collective learning, fusion of styles, good atmosphere among friends, always with respect...
ivax