I think the future of AI in art and particularly music gets derided as an idea too quickly before considering the merits. There are people that have devoted their lives to music theory and analysis and yet can't apply it well enough to write a good song, let alone a great one, and Western popular music has largely been very formulaic since forever. Even with humans at the wheel most of the conventions are simple and widely used and re-used. The challenge for songwriters is to create interesting and unique music while still being accessible/enjoyable for the listener.

Tonally, it's already no problem to mimic instrumentation or the human voice. And with art obviously AI image generation is pretty far along.

Unnatural as it may be I definitely see AI getting to the point of creating an enjoyable, photorealistic movie (with soundtrack) from start to finish, indistinguishable from a man made film. Or, say, a passable "new" Bowie album if that's what you wanted, and eventually creating them on demand. We can't be that far off now from some of what I've heard already although a full seamless thing will be a bit.

As odd as it might be to consider, completely AI singers and actors will probably be able to offer a lot of new and unique timbres styles that actually sound good, rather than just simulating existing ones. If you consider the drastic differences between the very unique voices of say Chris Cornell, Elton John and Whitney Houston it's very clear that the range of untapped possibilities for what a good sounding singing voice/timbre is is pretty vast and that most will never occur naturally.

I don't want to undersell the nuance that goes with creativity and talent in people, but again much of what passes for it now isn't particularly creative from example to example either. And you'll undoubtably see studios have AI create film screenplays from existing books or old films, while at the same time tracking estimated production costs and using whatever working formula they can.

I wonder how much of the "human spirit" will play a role in what people want in movies and music - or with a lot of other things, really. AI could most certainly replicate Elton John's voice and create a never ending stream of new albums that sound like him but all that's going to do that is make folks appreciate Elton John more.

People also become fans of those that they can relate to and sympathize with and no one is really going to start idolizing the winner of the AI robot who won best supporting actor or who can play the drums the best. I can see some potential pushback in a lot of areas like that.

I guess that it depends on how you define machine learning, but I'm almost certain that there were products that arguably fit the definition before 2016.

To put it mildly!

I leaned genetic algorithms nearly 30 years ago and they were being used for pipeline optimisation before that.

People worry about deep fakes where you can't tell whether it's EJ or not but it wont be long until it's not clear whether there was ever a real personality being faked.

An interim or parallel stage will be a real human that is nothing but a front.

True creativity involves generating novel and valuable ideas. With its access to massive datasets, AI doesn't have a problem creating novel ideas, as new ideas are essentially new combinations of old ideas. The challenge AI faces lies in separating the wheat from the chaff, filtering out non-valuable novel ideas from the valuable ones.

https://www.amazon.com/Promise-Artif.../dp/0262043041
The Promise of Artificial Intelligence: Reckoning and Judgment (MIT Press)
So whether new songs, computer programs, medical procedures, products, or a nuclear launch sequence, etc. the human faculty of judgment (is/isn't good) won't be replaced by AI in the foreseeable future, even though most of the human work leading up to it will.

https://www.reuters.com/business/med...al-2023-12-13/

OpenAI is going to serve news stories from Axel Springer publications including at least one tabloid.

This is a dismaying but predictable evolution.

Yesterday afternoon, OpenAI teased its text-to-video model, Sora. Below is a link that will give you examples of the videos that Sora is able to create, apparently from fairly basic text prompts.

https://openai.com/sora



As is typical for AI advancements, people are both impressed and concerned.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-ne...led-rcna139065

As a point of comparison, here is where text to video was 10 months ago.

future's gonna be crazy

all of that and it still gives the absolute worst Chinese strategy advice

Did it suggest invading Taiwan?

Chinese poker.... This is a poker forum.

Sorry, didn't realise that poker and humour were mutually exclusive.

In which air Canada chatbot invents a refund policy that didn't exist, and a court finds Air Canada has to comply with that policy.

The chatbot has then been disabled

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...lines-chatbot/

https://www.politico.eu/uk/

Just the tip of the iceberg, but in the last few months, we have started to see a substantial amount of AI-generated disinformation related to the upcoming general election.

Here is an article about AI-generated photos being shared on social media that purport to show Trump hanging out with happy black voters.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68440150

And here is a video discussing a recent fake robocall from Biden urging people to stay home and not vote in the NH primary.



In each case, the content does not appear to have been solicited by Trump, Biden, or anyone on their respective staffs.

So basically AI is The Matrix.

People who want to believe will buy into it hook line and sinker. People who don't, will notice the way-too-smooth skin and other oddities and know what's up.

Maybe everyone will be conditioned to assume that literally everything is fake and all photo/video evidence of events becomes worthless. We essentially go back in time 50 years to before the internet existed and eyewitness accounts are all that matter.

Is this how society finally breaks free of social media's grasp? Or, do people use this to even further ensconce themselves into a bubble universe where they can carefully control any outside influence that might damage their fragile sensibilities or challenge their beliefs. Like those boys who left the 2p2 forum to make their own politics safespace. AI can generate an endless supply of feelgood articles that validate their feelings.

Am I out of touch? No, everyone else is just deplorable.

I'd be curious to see how courts ruling audiovisual evidence inadmissible due to how easily it can be manufactured would play out. No cctv, no wiretaps, no cell phone videos, no photographs etc.

Yeah, exactly. This turns the entire criminal justice system on its head once they correctly emulate things.

It gets even more nefarious once you realize how generally shitty some of the photo and video evidence is right now that gets people convicted of crimes. Grainy 720p video of someone with the right height, clothing, mannerisms to match the suspect is all you need. It'll trivial for an AI to spit out low res video of a 5'4" white guy in a red hat and cowboy boots clubbing all the babies at Seals "R" Us and then escaping in our suspect's 2003 lifted F-150 with a Calvin pissing on a pride flag in the back window.

I don't know if it will change evidentiary rulings that much. For hundreds of years, it has been relatively easy to fake documents, but that hasn't stopped courts from admitting properly authenticated documents.

Videos work much the same as documents. Somebody has to swear under penalty of perfury that this is a true and correct copy of security camera footage captured on X date and that the video has not been edited or altered.

And that's how I expect it will work going forward.

Fake videos will be be much more destructive in shaping public opinion, where the rules of evidence don't apply.

How hard will it be for Trump supporters to spam social media with fake videos of poll workers coaching voters, destroying paper ballots, tinkering with voting machines, etc.?
Not very. Those videos won't be admitted in court, but they obviously will be sufficient to convince the Playbigs of the world, who are prepared to believe anything that confirms their weltanschauung.

I see your weltanschauung and I (string) raise you a schadenfreude.

The playbigs of the world are already beyond redemption, they'll take a 5 year old's scratchings on an etch a sketch as evidence that the nuclear holocaust is coming on April 1st if enough like-minded people on FB or Twitter share a video saying it's so. It's the reasonable yet not hugely critically minded or discerning majority getting swayed that I am worried about; the fringes are already entrenched.

true. think it leads to even more extreme polarization, where even reasonable people can write off any evidence contra their worldview as deepfake conspiracies perpetrated by outgroups

agree fringes are already entrenched, but faked video could be enough to push them to more extreme and destabilizing beliefs/actions en masse

+1 to inso0, one of the scariest consequences is video footage, personal testimonies, etc. become worthless and we can't trust anything. people no longer have to believe any footage on the nightly news if they don't want to.

in further dystopian news, google gemini anyone?