Google is embedding inaudible watermarks right into its AI generated music - eviltoast

Google is embedding inaudible watermarks right into its AI generated music::Audio created using Google DeepMind’s AI Lyria model will be watermarked with SynthID to let people identify its AI-generated origins after the fact.

  • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s a parasocial relationship and it’s not healthy, sure Taylor Swift is kinda expressing her emotions from real failed relationships but you’re not living her life and you never will. Clinging to the fantasy of being her feels good and makes her music feel special to you but it’s just fantasy.

    Personally I think it would be far better if half the music was ai and people had to actually think if what their listing to actually sounds good and interesting rather than being meaningless mush pumped out by an image obsessed Scandinavian metal nerd or a pastiche of borrowed riffs thrown together by a drug frazzled brummie.

    • Stuka@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lol, somehow you got the above commenter covering the sentiment that a song is better if it’s message is true to its creator…something a huge percentage of the population would agree with, and you equate that to fan obsession.

      People on the internet are wild.

      • WillFord27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t understand where they got any of that from, lol. It’s like they learned what a parasocial relationship is earlier today and they thought it applied here

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would kind of agree with this if it wasn’t kind of mean and half of it didn’t come out of nowhere, but then it also seems like what you think you value in your own music taste is whether or not something is new, seeing as your main examples of things that are meaningless or bad is “image obsessed scandinavian metal nerd” i.e. derivative and “pastiche of borrowed riffs thrown together by a drug frazzled brummie” i.e. derivative.

      • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ha no you are right, I was being a dick - i worked long enough in the music industry that it’s scarred my soul and just thinking of it brings up that bile…

        But yeah I was just being silly with the band descriptions, I was describing some of the music I like in a flippant way to highlight the absurdity of claiming some great artistic value because Ozzy mumbled about iron man traveling time for the future of mankind - dice could come up with more meaningful lyrics than ‘nobody helps him, now he has his revenge’ is the sort of thing an edgy teenage coke head would come up with – it’s one of my favourite songs of all time, another example of greatest songs of all time is Rasputin by boney m, famously part of a big controversy when people discovered they were a manufactured band and again the lyrics and music are both brilliant and awful.

        People obsess over nonsence all the time, it’s easy to pretend there’s some deep and holy difference between Bach and Offenbach but the cancan can mean just as much as any toccata if you let it.

        Art is in the eye of the beholder, it has always been thus and will always be thus.

    • WillFord27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can’t tell if you’re completely missing the point on purpose, or if you actually don’t understand what I mean lol. Who said anything about Taylor Swift?

      • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can replace her with whatever music you associate with, what I’m getting at is your connection to it isn’t real - it feels real but that’s because it’s coming from you, you’re putting the meaning in there.

        If you could erase all memory of Bach from a classical obsessives mind then play them his greatest hits and say it’s from an AI they’d say ‘ugly key smashing meaningless drivel’ maybe they’d admit AI Brahms has some bangers but without the story behind it and the history of its significance it’s not as magical.

        The problem I have is people are to addicted to shortcuts, ‘oh this is Bach people say he’s great so this cello suite must be good therefore I like it’ it’s lazy and dumb. (I use Bachs cello suite as an example because it’s what’s on the radio but you can put any bit of music as the example)