An A.I. Dystopian Threat ... to Katy Perry?
Human vs Machine In Defense of Rights and Creativity
Listen to An A.I. Dystopian Threat ... to Katy Perry?
If you are not a fan of modern art, a dystopian future in which its purveyors are easily replaced by "machines" might not be so unpleasant a vision. A three-year-old could do better is a common refrain. Yes, but can they sell it for three million dollars? AI can probably run the numbers, design the “art,” deploy focused marketing, and spew out a list of people who don't think about money and could be convinced to buy it.
All before some struggling artist can put the canvas on an easel. And it’s just as awful.
How about AI occupying literature, film, or music? Anyone with a streaming service knows there is more bad content out there than good. Would it be such a bad thing if the Evil Persian-stroking big tech masterminds used their secret underground lairs to create AI music to replace Skrillex or Ke$ha?
How hard would it be to get the Beatles “back together” now or in fifty years, and who, among those who didn't know better, could tell the difference? You'd need only own the rights. Holographic generators could replace them on stage (if you needed or wanted to go there), and people looking to make even more money on that sort of thing will be quick to advocate spaces for AI entertainment.
Given the price of tickets to see the real thing, an audience already exists and is waiting. But human artists are not sitting on their hands. Their dystopian future doesn't involve robots replacing workers; it involves AI replacing them.
Pushing Back
Creative minds can be expensive, and the truly talented command huge sums. The recent Hollywood writer's strike was very much about money and the AI threat. Their new contract is stuffed with protections to keep AI from replacing them, and yesterday, an open letter appeared on Medium, signed by 200 musicians along the same vein. They are concerned with how technology will "devalue music." Nobodies, really, like Pearl Jam, Nicki Minaj, Stevie Wonder, Katy Perry, Elvis Costello, and the estate of Frank Sinatra. At issue is the ability to run everyone's everything through an AI, which can then generate (in this case) "music" with or without voice to satisfy any mood or moment on command.
Alexa, play some royalty-free Andalusian, Electroacuistic Creole Hip Hop.
Alexa does it, and some struggling artist never makes it big enough to buy a weekend beach house in Southern California. And no more temperamental divas who need bowls of white M&Ms in their dressing rooms, or they won't perform.
That day might be today, according to the aforementioned letter and musicians.
"When used irresponsibly, AI poses enormous threats to our ability to protect our privacy, our identities, our music and our livelihoods," the open letter states. It alleges that some of the "biggest and most powerful" companies (unnamed in the letter) are using the work of artists without permission to train AI models, with the aim of replacing human artists with AI-created content.
I'll let the lawyers get rich working out whether recording contracts give Record Labels the right to use the work in that way, but I think - and they never say - the true threat is Alphabet (Google), Amazon, Meta, and their ilk. Google's Android has long had a feature that, when enabled, permits your smartphone to listen to music and tell you the song and artist. While that feature may not be as intuitive as an AI deconstructing nuance to abuse later, our devices are already listening. Filtering that through AI on the fly would be child play, as would generating a product from it.
It's Not Just Music
Someone for whom I do frequent writing work (technical and general) asked me the other day if I use AI. You can ask AI to generate anything written, and depending on the request, the result will be spot on or a framework you can edit or tweak to make it your own. Hollywood writers saw it coming, as did another vendor from whom I once acquired paid work from time to time. He is looking at how AI will impact his livelihood and has expressed concern to me personally. It's a real threat.
I do not use AI. My 'work' is 100% human, as if born in Zion. I prefer to let my mind search awkwardly (at times) for the words rather than wrestle with finding my meaning in something spewed out by AI. Yes, I have met my AI opponent, but there is a disconnect or lack of nuance in the way that sounds in my head when I read it. And while writer's block finds everyone, I'd rather struggle to get it right (or wrong) on my own than teach a machine to do it.
Writing is cathartic for me, first and foremost, and as long as the internet has a place for me to vent, whether others read it or not, I’ll keep at it. I’m not too concerned about AI. It can’t be me, but the job of greeting card writer has waning potential, with poetry not far behind.
The money behind the movie and film industry will want very much to explore new technology that uses AI to generate video. It exists now but generating movies with a list of queues to an AI still needs work. I think the porn industry will probably go there first. Corporate media has already reported on AI-generated women who have garnered massive followings on social platforms—attractive models set in various exotic locales. Removing the bikinis would be a no-brainer, and AI graphic art geeks living in the Insel modern world have already stormed this beachhead.
Fashion Models who don’t do runway work should be concerned.
As for music, I have a great appreciation for the time, effort, and skill required to create and perform it. Doing that well is just another degree of difficulty. So, the question is not whether the technology will move on their market share; it is how and when. I don't believe it can be stopped, but it will have to compete, and here is where I think the threat of AI presents an opportunity.
Artists accept that AI can do a lot of good, but they must also accept that the Internet must remain open and free to all forms of expression—all of them. Billions of people are online daily looking for entertainment, and millions are looking for an audience. While they won't all have the juice to market themselves the way an AI record label or some Big Tech Kraken like Alphabet can, competition and quality still matter, and adding voices to the chorus of those who will fight to protect artistic liberty in digital spaces is good for more than their ability to earn a living. It is good for Free Speech.
And I'm all about what's good for free speech.