The revived (AI) versions have this...thin and hollow sound to it. It is difficult to explain, most AI-generated songs have this when they're modelling acoustic drums, stringed instruments, etc.
FWIW, I'm (now a hobby) musician and have done studio work. Even the latest and best models have this unmistakable sound.
I was somewhat surprised to find out that illiteracy does not mean that someone needs to be a total (or near) analphabet - but rather that it is a broad and wide spectrum. I always imagined that “teenagers can’t read” meant that they couldn’t read at all, but then I never met such a person.
Reading is definitely a skill that needs to be learned and maintained. Going from reading a couple of hundred words, to even a longer 30 - 60 min article can be tough if you’re out of shape. Same with writing.
It makes me wonder if literate people can regress to illiterate, for no other reason than lack of reading maintenance.
I sometimes see people "celebrate" this, with the rationale that China is cracking down on white-collar crimes and handing out sentences unheard of in the west.
But, are these sort of things just examples of selective prosecution? Would the inner circle members of CCP leadership realistically face the same prosecution and sentencing, if they were to be caught doing the same?
One important part of the story is in the very beginning: The founder’s motivation. To become wealthy.
You see this in the startup world a lot. Founders with 5+ failed startups in different sectors, because said founder picked the fields mainly by doing some market analysis. Not domain expertise.
There’s then a big mismatch between what the founder thinks is possible, and what the domain expert thinks is possible.
The defense is of course that some people can do that - Musk did it, so why not?
Another defense is that blindingly naïve optimism is sometimes needed to move the needle, as the concept “that can’t be done” simply doesn’t exist to some people.
I’ve sat through some pitches like that, where it is very obvious that the founder/CEO has limited knowledge and expertise in what they’re pitching, where the product is limited, but their enthusiasm is off the charts.
EDIT: The very latest happened only a couple of weeks ago. A startup had reached out to my employer as they’re developing a platform in our domain. Higher ups liked what they’d seen, enough to arrange a real meeting.
Startup is only 3 months old, and the moment I opened the platform I recognized a vibecoded (likely using clause) platform identical to almost all other launched on a daily basis.
So I probed a bit about data sources, serious questions regarding security, etc. but the guy was pretty fluent in consultant (turns out he had worked as a management consultant before launching), and the CTO was just nodding along.
In the end they wanted our data, and promised the moon on features - but as mentioned, I’m sure the whole product was entirely vibecoded.
Today I read about Accenture Norway taking in 56 summer internship students from over...1600 applicants. Record year, they reported.
Previously I imagined only the top-top tier firms could enjoy low single-digit acceptance rate, but here we have Accenture crushing it. Competition must be tough.
(But for what I know, could be that AI has made it easier for people to spam everyone with applications)
I believe in many countries, the standard for a wide range of IP is that if something is largely produced by AI systems, it can not be patented / copyrighted / trademarked. It seems that "a significant" contribution must have been done by humans, that's the word you'll see again and again.
But I am not sure how one could prove that something is produced mostly by AI, or mostly by human. Right now anyone could use AI models to do most of the work, and just say or make up documentation that it is (major) human work.
So here's the thing: Laundry isn't really the chore that eats up my time. It takes like a minute or two to move clothes from the basket to the machine, and seconds to turn it on. Same with moving them to the dryer afterwards.
Same with easy tidying up.
What takes time, however, is cleaning and making food.
At that price point, and for the limited value it delivers...I think this is aimed squarely at the upper middle-class people. Those that are rich enough to not feel any economic stress from dropping $8k at a two-trick pony, but not rich enough to have a full-time domestic cleaner. Probably also aimed at the tech conscious people.
I'm still an active user in two different "crappy" old forums where the posts are shown in sequential order.
Let me tell you one thing, after having used reddit/hackernews tree-like structure for years, it is hard - extremely hard - to go back to using the older types of forums.
The problem is that they need very active moderation. It only takes two users to completely derail a thread, or clutter up everything. When you have two users that start arguing / discussing, it completely ruins the flow for everyone else. Also, jumping back and forth from page to page is annoying.
That's the logistical aspect of it.
Most older forums I used, seems to have migrated to facebook groups years ago.
My recollection, growing up and living mostly in Scandinavia
90s - mid 2000s:
- Pre social media days, you visited home pages.
- Chat was done via IRC, ICQ, what have you.
- Forums, news groups, etc. were the places to discuss things with others.
mid 2000s - early 2010s:
- Chat moved from IRC to MSN Messenger and the likes.
- Social media (SoMe) took off. Started with lots of smaller SoMe sites, which were eventually made obsolete or acquired by big players. In the end Facebook dominated all.
- Media sites (Youtube, photo hosting, etc.) start taking up more space and focus.
- Smartphones are introduced, apps become a thing.
Early 2010s - late 2010s:
- Forums, news groups, etc. start to go extinct as owners and creators migrate to SoMe platforms.
- Personal websites die off.
- Everything becomes more and more walled garden. Everything starts requiring user, log-in, etc.
- Mass M&A spree consolidates products and services.
- The "linear" internet starts to die, as the big tech wants to monetize your attention completely. Everything starts to feel like some random feed.
- Buying digital products starts to take a tumble.
Late 2010s - now:
- Everything feels smaller, yet there is more content. All products are owned by the same players.
- It feels like there's a life-or-death battle for your attention. Most content feels like it should take tops 30 seconds to consume. Feeds feel like some stochastic hell where everything is in the extreme present.
- Content seems to have underlying motive, the more controversial the more you see it.
- You own nothing. Everything is a subscription, everything has a pricing plan.
- Dark patterns is the way of life now. It feels like you're interacting more with mechanisms made to make you buy something, than people. It feels relentless.
Could probably add another era for the past 2 years, but this covers most of what I'm feeling.
Inside the walled gardens there are other walled gardens for humans, but the closeness you had before feels gone.
Question: Do you take everything Trump declares as the absolute truth?
If Trump designates Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster to be a terrorist organization tomorrow, do you believe their church members to be terrorists?
This is a fundamental question, because at the very core of the case, these protesters have been labeled terrorists belonging to a "Antifa cell", aka. terrorist cell.
Do you believe that a anti-ICE protester transporting scream rockets is equivalent to a ISIS member transporting pipe bombs?
It is very much possible to have opinions, without basing your opinions on feelings. If Trump tomorrow declares that the sky is golden metallic, and that all humans can fly, disagreeing isn't opposing facts just because Trump has declared those as the new facts.
- The group was designated as "Antifa cell", and thus this became a terrorist and aiding terrorism charges.
- The judge went above and beyond to hand out harsh punishments. There's been commentary from previous state prosecutors that the sentences, and how they were carried out, were much harsher than predicted. The speculation was that these sentences are being handed out to be served consecutively, not concurrently.
Would not surprise me if some of them could be appealed as "cruel and unusual punishments" / 8th amendment.
Here's the thing: The traditional / establishment democrats have blindly believed that you can negotiate with people like Trump, because of decorum. Establishment candidates have been more occupied with taking the moral high-road, even if that resulted in loss after loss.
There's this ingrained belief that if you just play nice with republicans, they'll play nice back. And that was valid for a long, long time. The problem is that Trump completely upended that, though he was not the start of it - he's just the natural consequence of populism and the ground that had been fertilized for years.
The reason why Trump has been allowed to hijack the republican party, is because of how the two-party system in the US works. Trump has an iron grip on a sizable number of voters, and thus the GOP had to kowtow to Trump.
Luckily Trump is MAGA, and MAGA is Trump. I fully expect that the current MAGA movement will fracture and splinter into smaller factions once Trump is out. And from the looks of it, they do not have any plan B. No front runner in sight.
The writing on the wall is pretty clear now: Undoing Trump-policies and Trump-legacy should be priority for any potential presidential dem candidate, no mater how center or left leaning.
I don't think we'll get a Ocasio-Cortez type front runner, but I don't think you can be a total milquetoast "water under the bridge" candidate to win either.
If there is one thing the Trump 47 presidency has shown, it is that traditional decorum will not get you anywhere. It is the reason the Trump investigation didn't end up with anything - Biden and the DOJ were too fixated on decorum, and doing things as impartially as possible.
The Prairieland case is a direct product of Trump. They are terrorists because Trump has designated them as terrorists.
I'm a musician by hobby, but used to make a living of it in my younger days. AI music has come to stay, can't do anything about it - the cat is out of the bag.
I know professional musicians that will use AI models like Suno as an aid to their tracks - mostly where they'd previously use samples or program things themselves. In these cases, where the track may be x% AI and (1-x)% Human performance, where x is very small, I think monetization or even copyright shouldn't be too difficult.
But I also know people that use tools like Suno for everything, where every single aspect of the song: Lyrics, music, production is all done by AI tools. They basically just prompt some style and vibe they want, and will upload the result. In these cases, I don't think monetization or copyright should be possible.
Then again, it is difficult to know how much AI someone used to generate their tracks, so I'm not sure how this could be enforced. I also know people that are earning very good money off their (entirely) Suno-generated tracks.