AI “training” is theft from human artists. Ban AI-gen completely.
this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2025
73 points (100.0% liked)
Music
10684 readers
308 users here now
↳ Our family Communities:
➰#Music
Music.world - !music@lemmy.world
Jazz -!jazz@lemmy.world
Album Art Porn - !albumartporn@lemmy.world
Fake Album Covers - !fakealbumcovers@lemm.ee
Obscure Music - !ObscureMusic@lemm.ee
Vinyl and LP's - !vinyl@lemmy.world
Electronic Dance Music - !edm@reddthat.com
60's Music - !60smusic@lemmy.world
70's Music - !70smusic@lemmy.world
80's Music - !80smusic@lemmy.world
90's Music - !90smusic@lemmy.world
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Agree on banning AI. Music is written, not generated.
Music has been one of the most powerful tools for human expression since the dawn of time. Ban.
If it's not disallowed outright at least require it to be clearly labeled
Ban.
Agree. Clanker punks fuck off.
Generated stuff is a waste of bandwidth and storage space. Ban ban ban
Ban ai bullshit
Allow AI posts if they are one of the following :
- 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".
I feel like you're making valid points for interesting use of the technology. The problem is that only accounts for such a small percentage of AI output, that it is impossible to moderate for. It takes someone very skilled with the tech to be able to achieve what you are describing. I also don't think anyone is going to nitpick over someone performing a song written by AI as the artists performance is the human element we identify with.
Ban AI here and there can be another community for that kind of content.
I disagree, it's not that hard to moderate. Lemmy is not a legal system, if a mod mistake happens no one gets hurt. Appeals are easy, and you can specify in the rules that AI content must come with a disclaimer and description of why its OK if it wants to stay, otherwise it gets banned with everything else AI.
For the 0.1% "OK" AI songs mods just have to stop and read a sentence description, its not an overwhelming burden for something that maybe comes through once a month.
I agree that we should start with a ban all AI content. But we could easily make exceptions for actual effortposts like those listed in the parent comment. It's not a huge leap. AI slop? Banned. Novelty from someone who used a tool that included AI? Well its not really slop, so don't ban it.
The problem is that only accounts for such a small percentage of AI output, that it is impossible to moderate for.
Why? The moderators are human, yeah, they might make some mistakes, but I think communicating these basic guidelines to posters to discourage slop AI use, and seeing occasional experimental AI use is feasible. Especially if you put in "if you are going to post AIs, please explain the reason why it fits into an acceptable criteria" , and ban the rest of the slop posts.
besides, the stuff I'm talking about ends up making niche, experimental music that is hardly going to blow up and take lemmy by storm. You know what it sounds like when you put sheep in a pen and have them press buttons? Random. You know what it sounds like when you interpret the messy data of realtime twitter? Random. It gets old quick, but it's a fun little thing that some people will enjoy for a bit, and take home something to think about.
My view is that it will go down as well as posting other experimental work; five upvotes, 2 downvotes, off the main page by sunset. I'll even put my money where my mouth is, I'll post something (non ai) experimental now and see how well it does.
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.
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
I think you’re conflating “AI” (LLM) with procedural generation. The former should be banned, the latter allowed.
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.
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".
I think once someone mentions "algorithm" or "I generated" it's over. People won't care about the details, because they're people.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I won't listen to AI generated music. It doesn't belong anywhere, in my not so humble opinion.
Yeah, disallow it. It's stolen pap that only makes the unethical corporations richer.
While there is one singular ai song that I actually like due to it mocking abusive customers, I consider it the exception and not the rule.
I vote for banning AI-generated songs.