Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Trump Media Applies for AI-Related Trademarks

SARASOTA, Fla., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Trump Media and Technology Group Corp. (Nasdaq, NYSE Texas: DJT) ("Trump Media" or the "Company"), operator of the social media platform Truth Social, the streaming platform Truth+, and the FinTech brand Truth.Fi, announced today that the company has applied to register trademarks for “Truth Social AI” and “Truth Social AI Search.”

The trademarks relate to a new Trump Media initiative to develop an artificial intelligence function to appear directly on the Truth Social platform.

Trump Media's CEO and Chairman Devin Nunes said, “Integrating AI into Truth Social will be a big push forward in our initiative to expand and enhance the platform, further developing the Truth Social ecosphere as a one-stop-shop for reliable information, non-woke news, and entertainment.”

The AI feature is planned for integration into the Truth Social iOS and Android apps as well as on the Web.

Cautionary Statement About Forward-Looking Statements

This press release includes forward-looking statements regarding, among other things, the plans, strategies, and prospects, both business and financial, of Trump Media. We have based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations and projections about future events, including expected potential merger & acquisition activity, the rollout of products and features, our Bitcoin treasury strategy, the future plans, timing and potential success of the streaming services and the launch and success of our financial services and FinTech platform. Although we believe that our plans, intentions, and expectations reflected in or suggested by these forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that we will achieve or realize these plans, intentions, or expectations. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. Generally, statements that are not historical facts, including statements concerning possible or assumed future actions, business strategies, events, or results of operations, are forward-looking statements. These statements may be preceded by, followed by, or include the words "believes," "estimates," "expects," "projects," "forecasts," "may," "will," "should," "seeks," "plans," "scheduled," "anticipates," "soon," "goal," "intends," or similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that may cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations that we describe in our forward-looking statements. There may be events in the future that we are not accurately able to predict, or over which we have no control.

About Trump Media

The mission of Trump Media is to end Big Tech's assault on free speech by opening up the Internet and giving people their voices back. Trump Media operates Truth Social, a social media platform established as a safe harbor for free expression amid increasingly harsh censorship by Big Tech corporations, as well as Truth+, a TV streaming platform focusing on family-friendly live TV channels and on-demand content. Trump Media is also launching Truth.Fi, a financial services and FinTech brand incorporating America First investment vehicles.

 

Posted
On 7/15/2025 at 8:26 PM, Vegas64 said:

Has anyone been following the Windsurf stuff? Crazy scenarios and crazy implications on the future of M&A, acquihires, and start-up ecosystem in general.

What is the windsurf stuff you are referencing?

 

All I know is Windsurf is online modeling for re Acq/Dev and Cursor is basically comps for re transactions.

 

Are they going to ruin my industry?

Posted

So that info regarding these companies being real estate related was from ChatGPT. I looked around online for info on them, found none. Went back to ChatGPT and the response was, oh yea, sorry, I was completely wrong about that. The info I gave you wasn’t remotely based on anything accurate.

So there’s an example, I guess.

Posted

Mistakenly posted this in the CR thread about AI, but this is the thread I was looking for....

This dude went down the rabbit hole of AI and it looks like it fried his fucking brain. Runs a VC that has dumped big money into OpenAI. I read a bit of his background and he seemed like a prime candidate to spend a good amount of his days huffing his own farts. Looks like AI accommodated him. The very product he invested in seems to have brought about his mental breakdown. Or its some bizarre performance art. Weird either way

 

https://futurism.com/openai-investor-chatgpt-mental-health 

https://bedrockcap.com/geoff-lewis

 

Posted
18 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

ruthlessly maintain cognitive hygiene

I like it. Not a trait we find in abundance in this country. Good thing we are bolstering mental health resources to address it.

Posted
On 7/19/2025 at 9:44 PM, tbone_ said:

What is the windsurf stuff you are referencing?

 

All I know is Windsurf is online modeling for re Acq/Dev and Cursor is basically comps for re transactions.

 

Are they going to ruin my industry?

Referencing how windsurf was gutted and then the husk was sold off, potentially screwing early employees who didn’t own significant equity. It seems, as it played out, it was more or less made right and folks were made whole, however but it didn’t look like it would be the case at first.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
On 7/1/2025 at 11:35 PM, Vegas64 said:

White Collar AI-thletes:

image.png.6798c97727bdd65874c0d51ba71bc69a.png

image.thumb.png.c3bda9393acdc844388d3baf991455e4.png

Another AI-theletes $$$ news drop:

 

In 2021, NBA legend Steph Curry finalized a four-year, $215 million contract extension.

Mark Zuckerberg recently offered 24-year-old Matt Deitke $250 million over four years to come work at Meta’s superintelligence lab, and he accepted. Ars Technica compared that to J. Robert Oppenheimer’s $10,000 annual salary in 1943 for leading the Manhattan Project, which, adjusted for inflation, would be $190,865 today.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Another AI-theletes $$$ news drop:

 

In 2021, NBA legend Steph Curry finalized a four-year, $215 million contract extension.

Mark Zuckerberg recently offered 24-year-old Matt Deitke $250 million over four years to come work at Meta’s superintelligence lab, and he accepted. Ars Technica compared that to J. Robert Oppenheimer’s $10,000 annual salary in 1943 for leading the Manhattan Project, which, adjusted for inflation, would be $190,865 today.

It will be interesting to see if a 24 year old can live up to those expectations. Are there individuals that are that talented to deserve that?  They guy requiring $200 million over 4 yrs fell just short of being qualified?

  • Haha 2
Posted
On 8/4/2025 at 9:08 AM, Vegas64 said:

Another AI-theletes $$$ news drop:

 

In 2021, NBA legend Steph Curry finalized a four-year, $215 million contract extension.

Mark Zuckerberg recently offered 24-year-old Matt Deitke $250 million over four years to come work at Meta’s superintelligence lab, and he accepted. Ars Technica compared that to J. Robert Oppenheimer’s $10,000 annual salary in 1943 for leading the Manhattan Project, which, adjusted for inflation, would be $190,865 today.

Yeah, I know I'm an AI doomsayer from a white-collar worker's perspective, but when I see numbers like this being tossed at the handful of people in the world that could really move the needle in the advancement of AI, it makes me wonder if we're in a big hype bubble.

A lot of companies in the AI race have had huge investment and valuation spikes due to the promise of AI.  The hype of AI.  It's all based on some hypothetical amazeballs AI payoff for these companies.  Then, when I see those companies are willing to give $250 million to a single worker (albeit a very talented one with a very unique and rare skillset), that makes me wonder if they are getting worried about their ability to live up to the hype.  What if today is as good as AI gets?  Or what if the ability to fuel more transformative change is a decade vs a year away?  What happens if it becomes apparent that all these bets people have made on AI aren't going to pay off anytime soon?

In general, the people hyping AI have at least this among probably many more benevolent motives: to maintain the hype-based valuations of their companies and investments.  At the same time, those companies appear to be desperately hunting for The One that can make all the hype a reality.  It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

its usability in the last 6 months is night and day different. I don't think we common folk can truly appreciate how much farther it can develop. once the agents hit mainstream with some reliability it's a massive game changer. right now I have a really smart researcher at my disposal that sometimes gets things wrong but it's good enough to research, report and write for me. what it can't do is execute. as soon as it can make reservations, unsubscribe from an monthly reoccurring charge, or even do some assistant level work for me, it's game fucking over for a lot of the help.  as long as those of us in our late 40s and 50s can adapt to using AI we will be fine. the utes are fucked. trades really are looking like a great way to find reliable work right now.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

On one hand... there are certainly job tasks that I appreciate using LLM for and wouldn't want them to go away. But at the same time, can't wait for this stupid speculative bubble for the ChatGPT and all this over investment to burst already, self-correct, and people get serious and start to actually figure out more positive for society uses. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 3
Posted
27 minutes ago, YChang said:

On one hand... there are certainly job tasks that I appreciate using LLM for and wouldn't want them to go away. But at the same time, can't wait for this stupid speculative bubble for the ChatGPT and all this over investment to burst already, self-correct, and people get serious and start to actually figure out more positive for society uses. 

Better Offline with Ed Zitron has a really good series running on this right now "The AI Money Trap" that isn't anything he hasn't covered before really, but it's bringing some relevant current information to the table. It's all a house of cards, propped up by cherry-picked ARR numbers that are not giving a realistic depiction of the state of their business.

And that bubble is responsible for a double-digit percentage of value on the stock market and a plurality of the total trades that occur in terms of value exchanged. Nvidia is only making as much money as they are while there's speculative business models that demand buying their chips. Once that speculative bubble is popped it's gonna get very interesting

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
6 hours ago, Captainant said:

Better Offline with Ed Zitron has a really good series running on this right now "The AI Money Trap" that isn't anything he hasn't covered before really, but it's bringing some relevant current information to the table. It's all a house of cards, propped up by cherry-picked ARR numbers that are not giving a realistic depiction of the state of their business.

And that bubble is responsible for a double-digit percentage of value on the stock market and a plurality of the total trades that occur in terms of value exchanged. Nvidia is only making as much money as they are while there's speculative business models that demand buying their chips. Once that speculative bubble is popped it's gonna get very interesting

This seems like a timely report too. MIT report says 95% of AI implementations don't increase profits, spooking Wall Street:
https://www.techspot.com/news/109148-mit-report-95-ai-implementations-dont-increase-profits.html

Posted
14 minutes ago, YChang said:

This seems like a timely report too. MIT report says 95% of AI implementations don't increase profits, spooking Wall Street:
https://www.techspot.com/news/109148-mit-report-95-ai-implementations-dont-increase-profits.html

The kicker? Nearly half of US GDP growth has been from AI data center spending. Spending which doesn't increase profits or drive revenue, and yet it's growth has been the main engine of economic activity since 2023 or so

  • Rage+1 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 3
Posted
On 7/14/2025 at 6:18 PM, Lidig8r said:

I do something similar.  And use it quite a bit to formulate the arguments of opposing counsel. It is generally not too bad with statutory authority but caselaw... well, I check each and every cite. (as any attorney should do).

Then, you can throw different fact situations at the issues and tweek arguments. I very much agree that an improving Ai program will be able to largely replace law clerks and very young attorneys

Well, then, how do the clerks and young attorneys become seasoned attorneys?

It's incumbent on us to know our arguments and the counter-arguments. And that's a skill that's honed by doing.  If the young and inexperienced aren't doing, I don't know how they'll ever become experienced.

I've never been surprised by opposing counsel's argument, sometimes their factual assertions, but rarely or never the argument itself.

Maybe it's because I've spent most of my life in federal courts, where the written argument is 90% of it.  I can see a lot more surprise in Texas state court, where briefing gets ignored in favor of oral argument.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, then, how do the clerks and young attorneys become seasoned attorneys?

It's incumbent on us to know our arguments and the counter-arguments. And that's a skill that's honed by doing.  If the young and inexperienced aren't doing, I don't know how they'll ever become experienced.

I've never been surprised by opposing counsel's argument, sometimes their factual assertions, but rarely or never the argument itself.

Maybe it's because I've spent most of my life in federal courts, where the written argument is 90% of it.  I can see a lot more surprise in Texas state court, where briefing gets ignored in favor of oral argument.

Preach to me. Like you, I have spent the last 20 years mostly in federal court and I like it a hell of a lot more than state courts.

I was fortunate to have been mentored by two, older, well respected attorneys. It was the many things NOT taught in law schools or which are not in legal tomes which opened my eyes.

The large law firms will continue to bring on the army of younglings (perhaps fewer than in decades past). But, the smaller to mid-size firms will inevitably push for cost savings and reduce staff.

More's the pity.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I can easily see a future where for lots of knowledge and creative work, the equivalent of bespoke tailoring or hand-crafted shoemaking emerges. Premium services where there’s a guarantee generative AI isn’t used; or where it’s clearly outlined to clients where the AI is used and where the human comes in. 

  • Like 1
Posted
13 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I can easily see a future where for lots of knowledge and creative work, the equivalent of bespoke tailoring or hand-crafted shoemaking emerges. Premium services where there’s a guarantee generative AI isn’t used; or where it’s clearly outlined to clients where the AI is used and where the human comes in. 

Yes. I agree.

Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, YChang said:

On one hand... there are certainly job tasks that I appreciate using LLM for and wouldn't want them to go away. But at the same time, can't wait for this stupid speculative bubble for the ChatGPT and all this over investment to burst already, self-correct, and people get serious and start to actually figure out more positive for society uses. 

I kinda agree with you but I think there is a level of nuance that should be employed when talking about speculative "bubbles". While they all have something similiar in common in an arc and a bust, they are not all created equally.

There is a lot of conversation about how a bubble is not just a lot of noise but actually a very positive signal.

Bubbles can be very productive if the asset or technology is going to be transformational (e.g. Internet vs Tulips) in that they build the foundations and infrastructure, encourage experimentation, segementation, creativity, IP, skillsets and experiences during the boom. When it busts, you have all the debris and detritus that will be valuable and integral inputs to the rise of the standardization and forms that mature.

Companies (and governments) are investing hundreds of billions into the data centers and infrastructure as @Captainant points out. Chip fabs, silicon, design, development. This isn't the same as dotcom's raising $100 million dollars and buying billboards and creating e-games to deliver coupons and pay for Super Bowl ads. 

I think we oughta be careful about lumping the AI bubble with the Crypto bubble (and even the latter has it's merits and of course naysayers).

Edited by Vegas64
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
13 hours ago, Vegas64 said:

I kinda agree with you but I think there is a level of nuance that should be employed when talking about speculative "bubbles". While they all have something similiar in common in an arc and a bust, they are not all created equally.

There is a lot of conversation about how a bubble is not just a lot of noise but actually a very positive signal.

Bubbles can be very productive if the asset or technology is going to be transformational (e.g. Internet vs Tulips) in that they build the foundations and infrastructure, encourage experimentation, segementation, creativity, IP, skillsets and experiences during the boom. When it busts, you have all the debris and detritus that will be valuable and integral inputs to the rise of the standardization and forms that mature.

Companies (and governments) are investing hundreds of billions into the data centers and infrastructure as @Captainant points out. Chip fabs, silicon, design, development. This isn't the same as dotcom's raising $100 million dollars and buying billboards and creating e-games to deliver coupons and pay for Super Bowl ads. 

I think we oughta be careful about lumping the AI bubble with the Crypto bubble (and even the latter has it's merits and of course naysayers).


a better bubble would be the dot-com bubble, which it feels like this is mirroring.   

Posted
On 8/21/2025 at 8:56 PM, 956 Worldwide said:

I can easily see a future where for lots of knowledge and creative work, the equivalent of bespoke tailoring or hand-crafted shoemaking emerges. Premium services where there’s a guarantee generative AI isn’t used; or where it’s clearly outlined to clients where the AI is used and where the human comes in. 

 

On 8/22/2025 at 10:13 AM, Vegas64 said:

Yes. I agree.

Related, a cross post from the music forum:

A thoughtful perspective from Rick Rubin.  While I think he’s right about what AI lacks now (a unique perspective), it kind of presupposes that the average music consumer cares about such high falutin’ ideas.

I think this is where AI augmented human creativity comes in.  The human providing the editorial perspective and AI allowing rapid iteration through ideas.

Like, I saw a print from someone at a coffee shop who described themselves as an “AI artist.”  It was of a handful of sheep eating dollar bills from a feeding trough and ignoring a lush field of grass behind them.  A kind of cynical statement about life in a capitalist society.

Using Rick Rubin’s terms, the human provided the perspective in the piece of art, and AI just provided easier access to that perspective being realized in a tangible way.  I think that is the sweet spot for using AI in art forms like music.

Posted
14 minutes ago, Goredho said:

 

Related, a cross post from the music forum:

A thoughtful perspective from Rick Rubin.  While I think he’s right about what AI lacks now (a unique perspective), it kind of presupposes that the average music consumer cares about such high falutin’ ideas.

I think this is where AI augmented human creativity comes in.  The human providing the editorial perspective and AI allowing rapid iteration through ideas.

Like, I saw a print from someone at a coffee shop who described themselves as an “AI artist.”  It was of a handful of sheep eating dollar bills from a feeding trough and ignoring a lush field of grass behind them.  A kind of cynical statement about life in a capitalist society.

Using Rick Rubin’s terms, the human provided the perspective in the piece of art, and AI just provided easier access to that perspective being realized in a tangible way.  I think that is the sweet spot for using AI in art forms like music.

I must be a rube because I actually read Rick Rubin's "The Creative Act: A Way of Being" where he talks about all this, and I found it to be mostly intelligible.

To this point above, I think we have to strip back to the extreme-- the most pure and first question of art:

Is it possible to create something new?

or is everything already all created and depending on the combinations of parts you can create something that appears new, but utlimately all art is derivative (just different sophistications)?

I believe the latter, and if you have a corpus of data in LLM's that is expansive enough, which I think we are going to have int he near term, why could you not prompt AI with a unique POV to create art?  

Posted
1 minute ago, Vegas64 said:

or is everything already all created and depending on the combinations of parts you can create something that appears new, but utlimately all art is derivative (just different sophistications)?

 

Welcome to Hollywood. 

Posted

Also, I'd like to crosspost here a gripe:

On a serious note, the things that sucks the worst about the commodization of LLMs and GPT's is that those of us who actually are extremely well read and with an extensive and arrayed vocabulary (and who have horrible writing crutches like the em dash, which are organically and well earned from years of trying to write in at least a semi-serious manner)-- we are the babies who are thrown out with the bath water when it comes to automatically disqualifying our original writing as cheap ChatGPT output.

image.jpeg.92c3221f76c593ab1ecf13963c86bfda.jpeg

  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Vegas64 said:

Is it possible to create something new?

or is everything already all created and depending on the combinations of parts you can create something that appears new, but utlimately all art is derivative (just different sophistications)?

I believe the latter, and if you have a corpus of data in LLM's that is expansive enough, which I think we are going to have int he near term, why could you not prompt AI with a unique POV to create art?  

I think the genesis of rap music is a good example to examine in this context.  How did rap music as a genre form after some isolated protorap tunes like SugarHill Gang's "Rapper's Delight"?

A lot of it was a human expression of music using the tools that poor black kids in the ghetto had at their disposal.  R&B, funk and soul records from the 1960s and 1970s and a couple of turntables -- all borrowed from parents.  A DJ would take the same record on both turntables and alternate playback of the same passage of music to create a continuous vamping loop.  They'd provide decorations and fills using scratching and other DJ techniques.  A rapper would vocalize in a rhythmic chant vs sung melody about life as an African American in the 'hood.  This is the core of songs like Public Enemy's "Don't Believe The Hype", Eazy E's "Boyz-In-The-Hood" and Ice Cube/NWA's "Fuck The Police" and other such songs from the era where rap exploded onto the scene.  These are people that had a desire to express themselves and their life's experience, but without access to the traditional tools to make a full music production.  So they invented a new form of music with the tools they had, printed albums and cassettes, distributed via their own record label which meant initially selling it out of the trunk of their cars to others in the hood.

And as much as people can criticize rap, one thing you cannot take from it at that time is that it was raw and authentic.  It was an expression of real human emotion and hardship at a time when glam was over, punk was winding down, hair bands were dominating rock with songs like "Girls, Girls, Girls", and grunge had yet to emerge from the pacific northwest, sopped with angst.

An interesting experiment would be, if you took an LLM and trained it on just the music of 1960s-1970s R&B, funk and soul records, could it invent rap or something like it without a human perspective providing input and feedback?  I don't definitively know, but I would guess, no, it couldn't.  Or at least not with intent.  It might luck into it by chance as Rick Rubin says is possible.  But it does not have the experience of life in the ghetto to guide it.  It does not have poverty limiting the tools it has at its disposal.  It hasn't been slammed down to the street top by black police showing out for the white cop.  It doesn't have other people from the ghetto validating it by buying it out of the trunk of someone's hooptie.  In a vacuum of all of that lived context provided by humans, I don't think AI would "discover" this new genre.

But maybe I am wrong about that, I dunno.

Edited by Goredho
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Vegas64 said:

Also, I'd like to crosspost here a gripe:

On a serious note, the things that sucks the worst about the commodization of LLMs and GPT's is that those of us who actually are extremely well read and with an extensive and arrayed vocabulary (and who have horrible writing crutches like the em dash, which are organically and well earned from years of trying to write in at least a semi-serious manner)-- we are the babies who are thrown out with the bath water when it comes to automatically disqualifying our original writing as cheap ChatGPT output.

image.jpeg.92c3221f76c593ab1ecf13963c86bfda.jpeg

Start cultivating a love of the semi-colon and shorten sentences; AI prefers em-dashes and piling up clauses between commas. 

Posted
50 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Start cultivating a love of the semi-colon and shorten sentences; AI prefers em-dashes and piling up clauses between commas. 

tbh I much prefer an em-dash to the proliferation of ellipsis that seemed everywhere during the twenty-teens

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Goredho said:

I think the genesis of rap music is a good example to examine in this context.  How did rap music as a genre form after some isolated protorap tunes like SugarHill Gang's "Rapper's Delight"?

A lot of it was a human expression of music using the tools that poor black kids in the ghetto had at their disposal.  R&B, funk and soul records from the 1960s and 1970s and a couple of turntables -- all borrowed from parents.  A DJ would take the same record on both turntables and alternate playback of the same passage of music to create a continuous vamping loop.  They'd provide decorations and fills using scratching and other DJ techniques.  A rapper would vocalize in a rhythmic chant vs sung melody about life as an African American in the 'hood.  This is the core of songs like Public Enemy's "Don't Believe The Hype", Eazy E's "Boyz-In-The-Hood" and Ice Cube/NWA's "Fuck The Police" and other such songs from the era where rap exploded onto the scene.  These are people that had a desire to express themselves and their life's experience, but without access to the traditional tools to make a full music production.  So they invented a new form of music with the tools they had, printed albums and cassettes, distributed via their own record label which meant initially selling it out of the trunk of their cars to others in the hood.

And as much as people can criticize rap, one thing you cannot take from it at that time is that it was raw and authentic.  It was an expression of real human emotion and hardship at a time when glam was over, punk was winding down, hair bands were dominating rock with songs like "Girls, Girls, Girls", and grunge had yet to emerge from the pacific northwest, sopped with angst.

An interesting experiment would be, if you took an LLM and trained it on just the music of 1960s-1970s R&B, funk and soul records, could it invent rap or something like it without a human perspective providing input and feedback?  I don't definitively know, but I would guess, no, it couldn't.  Or at least not with intent.  It might luck into it by chance as Rick Rubin says is possible.  But it does not have the experience of life in the ghetto to guide it.  It does not have poverty limiting the tools it has at its disposal.  It hasn't been slammed down to the street top by black police showing out for the white cop.  It doesn't have other people from the ghetto validating it by buying it out of the trunk of someone's hooptie.  In a vacuum of all of that lived context provided by humans, I don't think AI would "discover" this new genre.

But maybe I am wrong about that, I dunno.

I think you are just explaining the rise of a new genre. I don't see why a very well thought out prompt would not be able to create the genre of music we know as "rap", given the contexts and inputs that you say were the reasons the genre emerged.

I watch a ton of DJ shorts because while I would never go a club or rave (clutches pearls), I find the highlight transition clips they share to be a) short b) impressive and c) creative.

But it just reminds me that all DJ/Electric music is, is inputs that have been manipulated and changed and massaged to create some new great sounds and music. The moving parts already exist.

To get philosophical: everything that's ever going to be created is already created, just deconstructed. You cannot create anything new, just re-arrange the recipe. IMHO, at least.

Posted
7 hours ago, Vegas64 said:

I think you are just explaining the rise of a new genre. I don't see why a very well thought out prompt would not be able to create the genre of music we know as "rap", given the contexts and inputs that you say were the reasons the genre emerged.

I watch a ton of DJ shorts because while I would never go a club or rave (clutches pearls), I find the highlight transition clips they share to be a) short b) impressive and c) creative.

But it just reminds me that all DJ/Electric music is, is inputs that have been manipulated and changed and massaged to create some new great sounds and music. The moving parts already exist.

To get philosophical: everything that's ever going to be created is already created, just deconstructed. You cannot create anything new, just re-arrange the recipe. IMHO, at least.

That's a terribly narrow way to interpet music and art in general. It isn't just the mere mechanism of production that makes art so impactful to people - it's the dialogue and conversation back and forth in a medium that isn't always explicit in its intent. I mean yeah sometimes in rap, it's pretty clear what their message is. Kendrick out front shoulda told ya. 

But with that example, what made Kendrick's music so interesting was its context and delivery and collaboration with other artists.

 

Hell, even just as a musician, you can take the same notes and rhythm on the page and produce a wildly different communicated emotion. Music and art is far more than just an idea, it's the execution and context its delivered that brings so much more meaning.

When the thing you're in conversation with is just a set of seven hundred billion parameters in a very very very very large parametric equation...... That's sort of missing the partner in the discussion that imbues art with its metaphysical meaning and value. Not to mention, LLM's definitionally produce an "average" of all the information they've been trained on. They definitionally cannot take in and internalize new information like a conversational partner can. It's very literally talking at a wall and you will never convince it of anything, until you spend another ten million bucks on a new training run for your large language model to give it a new set of ~700,000,000,000 parameters.

 

That's just my opinion at least, both as a life long musician and as a professional technical specialist in machine learning and large language models in particular (and a few other discliplines as well, dm me if you want to nerd out).

  • Like 2
Posted
14 minutes ago, Captainant said:

That's a terribly narrow way to interpet music and art in general. It isn't just the mere mechanism of production that makes art so impactful to people - it's the dialogue and conversation back and forth in a medium that isn't always explicit in its intent. I mean yeah sometimes in rap, it's pretty clear what their message is. Kendrick out front shoulda told ya. 

But with that example, what made Kendrick's music so interesting was its context and delivery and collaboration with other artists.

 

Hell, even just as a musician, you can take the same notes and rhythm on the page and produce a wildly different communicated emotion. Music and art is far more than just an idea, it's the execution and context its delivered that brings so much more meaning.

When the thing you're in conversation with is just a set of seven hundred billion parameters in a very very very very large parametric equation...... That's sort of missing the partner in the discussion that imbues art with its metaphysical meaning and value. Not to mention, LLM's definitionally produce an "average" of all the information they've been trained on. They definitionally cannot take in and internalize new information like a conversational partner can. It's very literally talking at a wall and you will never convince it of anything, until you spend another ten million bucks on a new training run for your large language model to give it a new set of ~700,000,000,000 parameters.

 

That's just my opinion at least, both as a life long musician and as a professional technical specialist in machine learning and large language models in particular (and a few other discliplines as well, dm me if you want to nerd out).

I appreciate and respect your opinion as a musician and technologist. I think our impressions and opinions are going to be colored by our beliefs to a degree. What is it we believe to be true about humans, art, music-- heck, the universe even.

That said, you mentioned Kendrick Lamar and what made his music interesting, I thought it was an interesting application of AI when in the midst of that rap battle Drake used AI to diss Kendrick Lamar by having AI create a Tupac diss:

Spoiler

 

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...