On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 21:21:10 +0200
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@email-addr-hidden-dsl.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 05:09:02 -0400, tom haddington wrote:
> >One might observe that the machine wrote bad music. Well, humans are
> >already doing that, too, so Magenta has gotten at least that far! As
> >with chess machines, it may be a matter of time.
>
> The point isn't, if a machine is able to fake music, it doesn't
> matter, if it's good or bad faked music. What the machine generates is
> completely uninteresting to me, since a machine has got no
> emotions I'm interested in. A machine has got no emotions at all, so
> even if the machine would generate "good music", it would be faked "good
> music", emotional fraud. Human impostors are able to e.g. fake love.
> Victims often feel more loved by an impostor, than by somebody who
> really loves them. Fraud could make us feel good, we anyway
> dislike fraud. That just shows what kind of company Google is. A human
> might be an untalented musician, but at least a human usually has got
> real emotions. A machine that is able to fake "good music" has got
> absolutely nothing to do with progress. It's a damage. Developing
> something like this shows the unimaginativeness of the developers.
> Nobody needs it, it's good for absolutely nothing and even not a
> useful step to learn something for useful AI projects or something
> like this.
>
> Regards,
> Ralf
For once I'm in total agreement with Ralf :o
Furthermore, there is not exactly a life-threatening shortage of music, so what
'need' does machine generated music fill?
-- Will J Godfrey http://www.musically.me.uk Say you have a poem and I have a tune. Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-userReceived on Sun Jun 5 00:15:02 2016
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jun 05 2016 - 00:15:02 EEST