1. #1

    User Info Menu

    The new digital composers are much lighter than the human ones:

    Last edited by Tal_175; 09-24-2020 at 06:24 AM.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    This is an interesting one.
    I think the few second duration samples are not enough to get even a draft picture, but still interesting.

    ****

    AI is coming, its evolution is exponential, not talking about that will be a singularity, where it will be capable evolve itself autonomuosly. Also human nature will not change, so pioneering and science will not stop, greed will not stop.. So the only question when... will AI rule everything... within 25 years or 50? From the perspective of human evolution it makes no difference: End of story.

  4. #3
    I studied AI at the Phd level and my current job partly involves developing a machine learning system. I think the dystopian worries about AI taking over the world is highly fictional.

    - AI typically means "problems we don't know how to solve yet". Chess programs beating top GM's or devices that can accept vocal commands used to be considered AI.

    - Currently the successful AI applications built for very specific tasks like playing chess, detecting credit card frauds etc. AI getting better means more specific tasks will be automated with better results. That's where the practical, money maker opportunities exist. Better AI doesn't necessarily mean devices equipped with a general intelligence and consciousness.

    - AI is a highly anthropomorphised concept. Many human traits that were products of our evolutionary processes are attributed to intelligence without being given much thought. Desire to acquire more power, fear of death, greed as well as altruism, self sacrifice etc have nothing to do with intelligence. These are goals, instincts built into us as traits to adapt to our particular ecosystem. Our behaviours are regulated by a reward/punishment system (pain, pleasure, happiness etc) to keep us on track towards achieving these goals. The regulation involves neurotransmitters (serotonin, dopamine etc) as well as other emotion mechanisms. Animals with lower intelligence also fear death or kill competitors to gain "power" and improve chances of survival since they were evolved under the same rules.

    Intelligence of a system and built in goals of a system are separate considerations. If our instincts for survival and fear of death were removed from us, it's not clear we would care much about staying alive regardless of how intelligent we are. Especially if you also remove the pleasure and suffering mechanics. Again none of these are a product of intelligence. So just because computers can acquire intelligence doesn't mean they'll try to wipe us out and keep all the power to themselves and reproduce more of their kind. That's just human talk.


    That said AI can change how we inherently view highly noble and prestigious endeavours like being a genius composer. I think it's an interesting problem for us musicians.

  5. #4
    I don't know the details of how this AI composition works but I assume that at some stage there is a "training set" of real scores that is used as input and then the AI extracts certain relevant feature or patterns. So my question is: who would or could be sued if an AI composition (say in the cinematic style) was judged to plagiarize one of the input scores?