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".

[–] nublug@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 23 hours 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.

[–] rudyharrelson@lemmy.radio 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day 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

[–] Hawke@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

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

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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.

[–] rudyharrelson@lemmy.radio 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

Maybe let's not presume how the community will behave given a new rule regarding generative AI. Music featuring digital instrumentation has certainly not been "burned at the stake" despite it not being "100% human made".

Music composed and performed by generative AI (which was trained on the works of other artists) would understandably be met with criticism within the music community, and is a far cry from "100% human made" in that it is closer to "0% human made".

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I think once someone mentions "algorithm" or "I generated" it's over. People won't care about the details, because they're people.

[–] Hawke@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Also, I think that LLM based generation is a subcategory of proc gen.

Hmm… I would usually think of proc gen as being more deterministic than what LLMs do (even if they use random numbers there’s usually a seed value to get consistent random numbers)

I guess in some ways the important part is how much work the purported artist put in to the output.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hmm… I would usually think of proc gen as being more deterministic than what LLMs do (even if they use random numbers there’s usually a seed value to get consistent random numbers)

I haven't re-installed my local copy of stable diffusion yet, but I'm pretty sure same seed + same prompt = same output. If you have one to hand, feel free to try... Thinking about this a bit more, I guess not, since you can run batches from the same seed, so I guess it's not exactly the same?

Either way, running the same seed + prompt at least gives you similar outputs. It belongs in the same type of... "tool"?

Maybe if the guidelines are to ban LLMs? But even then, I want the weird , difficult to create LLM stuff to be posted, as long as it's not suffocating everything else.

I guess in some ways the important part is how much work the purported artist put in to the output.

Yeah, I think this is something even the most hardcore AI guys will agree with. No one wants the community to be overrun by drivel.

[–] Hawke@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Haha… I don’t have stablediffusion because !fuck_ai@lemmy.world but I didn’t realize they were that close to procedural generation techniques.

The problem with “effort” as a metric is that there’s high effort shit as well as low-effort good stuff. But I suppose usually the high-effort shit at least has a good story behind it.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

yep. again, restriction instead of outright bans means that it's up to us to give a shit or not when someone actually tries properly instead of just pulling something out of their ass.