Kelly Clarkson: it's cool, creative what we're going to create musically with AI

[Junko Enoshima 4,716]

12 hours ago, gumzy3000 said:

Think Hatsune Miku but way more interactive and realistic looking. 

Oh honey very different thing. Don’t dare to compare her to AI because she is a canvas for artists.

[Cherry Blues 626]

Sad that she said that. 

[StrawberryBlond 15,718]

I think it's a big risk to say this as an artist as now everyone's going to ponder over your next album, speculating if you used AI. Then you've got people like Tyga straight up saying he used AI and is proud of it. For an artist to admit to this goes against all the artistic principles so it makes you wonder if there's behind the scenes forces making them say this. Like if they don't publicly support it, their label might not want them anymore. Because we know they're creating AI music and making bank off it and might want to launch AI artists. If real artists don't get on board with it, they could get replaced. I can only hope none of them are being forced to make AI music. 

[LG10 14,188]

so it went into her brain huh

[LGAte 1,406]

I think she is right in some ways. I get where she is coming from. 
 

At one point a calculator was considered cheating. At one point Adobe Photoshop was considered not real art because it was early generative and not a literal paint brush. At a certain point- you technically can use AI to create art. You can use anything to make art. 
 

I think it’s how you use it. Are you asking it to just blindly make something for you in lieu of actual creativity or thought? That’s problematic, and that has always been problematic because the problem is that it is not really yours to claim. But if I tell AI to generate a font for me that is something I can’t find anywhere, or I ask it to make a shape that is hard to draw, or if someone who is disabled maybe asks it draw something, or if someone prints it out and maybe makes a collage or they use it as a background that they then go in and edit themself with Adobe or they just use it and ask it “does what I made look like something, can you teach me more about what I am making”….these are all examples where using AI is not problematic. 
 

What’s interesting to me is that people have not clicked yet that the rich are actually creating a narrative that AI is bad because, much like early YouTube, it isn’t fully regulated yet. It’s the Wild West of tech right now. Which means poor people have the most access to learning and a high quality tool than they ever will. 
 

You understand that guilt tripping you into worrying about the environment is a tactic to make you not level the playing field, right? In capitalism, anyone can become competition. So why not brainrot into everyone thinking without nuance and going “AI BAD!”

AI, like any tool, can destroy the environment and pollute and have negative consequences for society. Which is why we should use government to regulate it.

But don’t be silly. There is DEFINITELY a motivation to make you feel morally superior for NOT using it. They don’t want you to accidentally use it well and succeed too much.

 

for the record…
 

Google is AI now. Wikipedia is AI. TikTok is AI. All of it is. It’s how you use it that can be bad. But for the most part I think people are using it and pretending like they are not so they are accepted in social circles. Woke 2 will fix that. 
 

I plan events and sometimes use it to structure my ideas or do clerical work or ask it to clock the dimensions on a flyer. But I never outright ask it “hey make this for me”. 
 

also one last thing…if you actually care about AI being bad…learn more about what Meta, Tesla, Amazon, Intel, Google, Microsoft are all doing differently. Some of them want to use existing grids which drives up costs. Some of them want to build their own power sources on site but get it subsidized. 
 

The smart solution would be to innovate how we can minimize impact and put safeguards in place that actually control bots from getting out of hand. 

Edited 9 hours ago by LGAte