Anderton

The one upside to chronic depression is death doesn't seem so scary anymore. The phrase "rest in peace" tacitly acknowledges there is a way that people who want peace can find it. Then resting in peace becomes a feature, not a bug 🤔. One possible reason for the affliction among creative people is that art almost requires getting more in touch with emotions. While that's a good thing in many ways, if you're not careful it can chip away at the defenses that keep empathy from getting out of control. Artists talk about "picking up on vibes," but at its most extreme you become hyper-sensitized to external stimuli. Feeling too much can be just as dangerous to your psyche as feeling too little. Some say artists do drugs because they want to "escape," without specifying that they're trying to escape from. I think it might be when external stimuli stops being manageable, and feels more like being attacked 24/7. I suspect that might have been what Keith Emerson was experiencing. Drugs add a layer of numbness that insulates the psyche somewhat from constant stimuli. But that same numbness also reduces the potential for joy, and if you can't experience joy, things just spiral down further. It's very much a negative feedback loop. Medication or drugs can treat the symptoms by interrupting the loop, but they can't get rid of the disease that causes the loop in the first place. Of course this is all just a theory, I have no medical background whatsoever.

I predict that technology will continue to advance. Brilliant, ground-breaking insights like that are why I'm a Nobel Laureate. 🤣

Machines will be able to write songs, but that doesn't mean they'll be able to write "standards."

When the original Kurzweil was demoed at AES, I was amazed at the sound quality and seamless velocity and positional splits. I made flattering observations that were used in a "quotes by an expert" context. What I heard didn't seem at all possible with the RAM and computational limitations at the time. Well, apparently it wasn't. A Kurzweil employee told me several years later there was a hard drive under the table holding the keyboard, and the hard drive was doing the heavy lifting. I felt deceived and exploited. Even if Kurzweil didn't actually plan the stunt himself (and I kind of assume he did), the buck stops with the name at the top of the company. I never reviewed or covered anything else done by Ray Kurzweil after that. As to his predictions, I predicted physical media would go away and we'd stream everything from a "celestial jukebox" back in the early 80s (the word "cloud" didn't exist then). Anyone with more than two brain cells could have predicted that computers would get smaller and would end up in phones and such. Over 40 years ago I said "Slowly but surely, computing power will decentralize. Using one box for widely diverging applications makes about as much sense as buying an internal combustion engine and putting it in your car when you want to go someplace, taking it out and strapping it to your lawnmower when it’s time to cut the grass, or putting it in your boat when you feel like going for a cruise. It makes more sense to just buy cars, boats, or lawnmowers with an optimized engine already built in." Think of how many devices, including phones, TVs, toys, tablets, cars, etc. have proven that computing has indeed become decentralized. Over 30 years ago, I said hard disk recording would disappear in favor of recording into RAM. And anyone who played with Dr. T's software on the C-64 or Laurie Spiegel's Music Mouse on the Amiga could tell that algorithmic-based composition would only grow in the years ahead. I mean, c'mon - who can't "predict" that 2 + 2 = 4? Gimme a break.

So...I listened to a bunch of the music that Suno generated. It's great for generic soundtracks behind videos where no one is supposed to pay attention to the music anyway. But were there any amazing listening experiences that I'd come back to time and time again? No.

"You grant to Suno and our affiliates, successors, assigns, and designees a worldwide, non-exclusive, fully paid-up, sublicensable (directly and indirectly through multiple tiers), assignable, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use, reproduce, store, modify, distribute, create derivative works based on, perform, display, communicate, transmit and otherwise make available any and all Content (in whole or in part) in any media now known or hereafter developed, in connection with the provision, use, monetization, promotion, marketing, and improvement of our products and services, including the Service. For the avoidance of doubt, this license authorizes us to make your Content available to and sublicense Content to other users of the Service as necessary to provide the Service, and you further grant to Suno the worldwide, fully paid-up, sublicensable, assignable, perpetual and irrevocable right to identify to the public (both on and off the Service) that Output (or any of it) was generated via the Service. Such additional uses by Suno and other users of the Service is made without compensation to you or any other provider of the Submissions with respect to the Content, as the use of the Service by you is hereby agreed as being sufficient compensation for the Content and grant of rights herein. Furthermore, and for the avoidance of doubt, you irrevocably waive any and all so-called 'moral rights' or 'droit moral' that may exist in or in connection with the Content." To be fair, it's non-exclusive. And the boilerplate basically says they will use what you create to further the service. Still, the reality is that what you "create" with Suno is not yours. Which frankly, it never was anyway.

I wrote about the implications this last year in one of my Open Channel columns for Mixonline - Does "AI" Stand for "Attorneys Incoming"? You might find it interesting.

Superficially, there are similarities. But with unauthorized sampled tracks and remixes, you could usually trace the copy back to the source. That's why it was possible to have lawsuits. The matter was often cut and dry, not unlike plagiarism. With AI, you don't know what source was scraped or stolen. You don't know who specified what it wanted AI to do, nor do you know how AI arrived at the result it did. Parallel discovery? Coincidence? Theft? Becoming sentient, and creating original content? This is why I think blockchain authentication would be a natural fit. It would also shed some light on the problem of ownership that I covered in one of my Mixonline columns, Does AI Stand for Attorneys Incoming? (Which FWIW was licensed for reprinting elsewhere, with my permission .) That sounds more like a definition that's closer to Machine Learning. Machine learning can't break out of the algorithms that govern its analysis and behavior. The point of AI is ultimately to be able to break free from those constraints, and mimic human thought processes.

Those who haven't experienced horrific depression may not understand that mental pain can be as bad as physical pain. If you were sitting in a cafe during an earthquake and a concrete beam fell on you, pinned you down, crushed your legs, pierced your liver, paralyzed your spine, and caused truly unbearable pain, you'd look upon dying as an upgrade. The only way I know of to get through suicidal-level depression is if you can be resistant enough to understand that it comes in waves. At the peak of the wave, the mental pain can be unbearable. If you can just hold on long enough until the wave is past its peak, even if there's still serious depression, you may stick around. The truly dangerous situations are when the wave never moves off the peak for extended periods of time. Medication can provide a temporary fix, but it's never a permanent one and the depression will always return. I believe this is why some people commit suicide after going off of these drugs. They realize the incontrovertible futility of the process. A corollary I see rarely discussed is that depression can remove the ability to derive joy from anything. Literally, anything. Leading a joyless existence is often the trigger for someone to wonder why they bother living when there's no incentive to continue. One of the biggest issues with suicide is collateral damage, where people kick themselves endlessly wondering what they could have done. The sad truth is that in many cases (I'd guess the majority) they couldn't have done anything. They can't blame themselves, any more than they could blame themselves for not knowing how to help the person mentioned in the first paragraph who was pinned under a concrete beam. Perhaps the best therapy is not to sugarcoat the situation. A lot of times people feel the pressure of thinking they should be happy, and the fact that they can't only causes the depression to spiral down further. Well-meaning people who try to cheer someone up just makes things worse, because it emphasizes the contrast between someone who's not depressed to someone who is. Paradoxically, sometimes resigning yourself to the fact that you'll always be depressed prevents it from getting worse, whereas trying to fight an unbeatable foe exhausts you from the frustration of never being able to find a solution. This makes you feel even more hopeless and powerless. The only way I know of to regain some of that power is to dedicate your life to helping others. It may not solve your problems, but at least it gives you a justification to stay alive.

The main difference is the Mellotron couldn't play itself. If you hired someone with a distinctive style like Jeff Beck and recorded "scales, chords, riffs, lead lines, chord progressions - the DNA of music," AI could assemble a "Jeff Beck" solo in seconds.

[I know this is a long post and most people won't read it. But I think the points it raises are important.] Good intentions tend to accomplish little, I think you have to define specifics. For background, I was a member of the Local 802 Musician's Union in NYC for many years when I was a studio musician. So, I know about agreements, scale, leaders getting double scale, etc. I recently consulted to someone high up in the movie industry who was involved in SAG/AFTRA negotiations. He wanted advice on whether it was possible to put practical limits on AI. My first suggestion was about avoiding a situation like Hollywood wanted to do with extras - hire them for a day, own their likeness, and use it ad infinitum with no compensation. I said that would be like hiring a musician for the day, and record scales, chords, riffs, lead lines, chord progressions - the DNA of music - which could then be reassembled on other sessions. My suggested remedy was that the material could be used on the same project for which the artist was hired, so a producer could, for example, piece together something for the outro if the musician wasn't available. But for projects outside the scope of the original project, the producer would need to negotiate with the artist for re-use. There's precedent. That would be no different than what happens with articles where I own the copyright (which is virtually all of them). If someone wants to reprint it, we negotiate a one-time license. Everyone wins: I'm willing to license for cheap because I wasn't expecting it anyway, whoever reprints it gets one of my articles for cheap, I still own the copyright, and it expands my audience. Also note that one of the main aspects of the SAG/AFTRA agreement is artist approval/permission. My upcoming Open Channel column for Mixonline.com (coming out sometime in April) addresses this subject in more detail if y'all want to know more. The above is one example of the kind of specifics I proposed regarding limiting AI. Another possibility is to use blockchain-based "smart contracts" that would clearly identify all steps involved in the creative process, including all contributors, terms of contracts, licenses, etc. This would "attach" itself to the work in such a way that works without the blockchain identification would be considered a violation of copyright. Getting into that in this post is going way too deep into the weeds, but suffice it to say that trying to stop copying or even outright thievery by the public is a losing proposition. However, authenticating and validating that which is real hopefully still has value. If someone tried to pass off something as a Dua Lipa album and tried to make some $$$ but couldn't because he didn't have access to the blockchain that would identify a genuine Dua Lipa production, would a consumer really want to be duped into buying a fake? They don't seem to want to do that with paintings. The bottom line is simple: In the hands of artists and creative people, AI will have more of a positive influence. In the hands of hacks, poseurs, and bean counters, it will have more of a negative influence. So, perhaps the goal shouldn't be about limiting AI. Perhaps it should be about making sure that creative people are compensated for their work. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Apple and Amazon spend billions on creating video content, but don't spend anything on developing new music content - despite distributing music commercially and making money from it. Ditto Spotify, SoundCloud, Tidal, etc. If there's no incentive to make great music, it's unrealistic to expect people to devote their lives to making great music. That creates a perfect vacuum for AI-generated crap that costs nothing to make. And as we all know, nature abhors a vacuum.

A bunch of new profiles have just been published on midi.org. There's a lot going on behind the scenes.

I'm no doctor, but I walk at least 1-3 miles every day, and have for most of my life. I've been told that's why my circulatory system is in good shape. Then again, maybe I just got lucky at genetic roulette.

I'm always surprised there isn't more emphasis on conservation. There are so many "always-on" devices these days. I honestly don't mind waiting a few seconds for something to get up to speed, compared to the energy spent on keeping an appliance in an "always on" condition. I've been to a lot of European countries where automatic light switches are a thing. If someone leaves a room, the lights turn off. I assume the circuitry required to turn the lights on and off depending on whether people are present draws some current, but not as much as leaving lights on when not needed. And, if people just set their thermostats a little higher in the summer and lower in the winter, cumulatively it would make a difference.

A common trick is putting a peak at 10 kHz - not huge, but enough to add some sizzle. One advantage of paying attention to the higher frequencies is that you can balance the upper midrange better instead of having it do all the work.

Well, I read the entire article, and the sense I get is whether the technology will be refined depends primarily on whether fossil fuels will continue to be more economical. Also, it seems the costs aren't solely in the process itself, but in creating an infrastructure that can recycle the uranium. It can't just be shipped to Russian or France, that infrastructure would need to exist here. If I had a ton of money and was asked to be an investor in this technology, my first question would be "how is the waste transported?" If the answer was trains, I'd run in the other direction due to liability issues. Given that there were over 700 train derailments in the US last year, one good explosion of radioactive material would be a lot worse than spilling30,000 gallons of hydrochloric acid or whatever. This isn't to say I'd reject the technology out of hand. It just seems that at best, it's quite a ways off before it can be brought to scale from a commercial standpoint, even if the political climate was favorable to it. It wouldn't surprise me if investors think instinctively that it's old technology, and are concerned that by the time they get it together, it will have been eclipsed by something better. But hey, what do I know? I didn't buy Apple stock when it was $35 a share.

As I said in the first post..."If nothing else, it might have helped them achieve their dominance with CarPlay. And who knows what kind of technology ended up in the Vision Pro?" I do believe CarPlay is in 80% of new cars.

It's a great idea, but from what I've read, the reliability isn't as good as either electric or ICE because there's more that can go wrong.

But don't forget that what technology takes away, it can also give back. My favorite example is vocal pitch correction. I can feel much more free when singing because if there are a few bad notes in an otherwise good performance, I can fix them. Before pitch correction, I'd have to do vocals over and over, or be really careful about punching. That's what scrubbed the feeling from my vocals.

For me, the same is true of writing. My first drafts suck. I have to spend a lot of time editing before my writing goes public.

Well, as always the situation is more complex than it appears on the surface. I'm sure xenophobia plays into it. However, in 2021 the China Internet Investment Fund bought a 1% share in TikTok. Normally, that wouldn't mean much in terms of control, but it's a China Government Guidance Fund, which is a government-meets-private group whose aim is to further China's industrial and political policy goals. It has influence on the companies with which it's involved that goes beyond that 1%, like having board members. ByteDance says there's no governement relationship to TikTok, the participation just relates to its China market video and information platforms, and the government holding licenses TikTok needs to operation. But of course they'd say that. Others think it's not quite so innocent, and It would be like if the NSA started having significant influence over Facebook. There is zero doubt that Russia, North Korea, Iran, and China are actively involved in sowing disinformation via social media to create discord in the US (and are doing a good job of it). The upfront, codified government involvement doesn't necessarily mean the intentions are nefarious. There are several ByteDance entities in different countries, including one in the US with its own CEO. They make decisions about the platform. Onlny 20% ownership is Chinese investors. 20% is employee-owned and 60% is various global investors. But day-to-day operations in other countries vs. government involvement in Beijing are two different things. One theory is that the government is mostly interested in what comes into China more than what goes out from it. Perhaps another issue with Americans is that TikTok's success is a blow to the ego. "We're #1! We have Facebook and Instagram! We have Google!" With China making advances in many areas, this is more along the lines of "China's way ahead of us in terms of electric cars, so we'll pass laws saying we can't import Chinese electric cars." All companies track you. This article will give you something to think about. TikTok sets itself up to run in the background, and adapt to system settings that restrict background activity. So if your phone is turned on, even if the TikTok app isn't active, it it still retrieves content, fetches updates, and sends analytic data about your browsing, ISP, etc. Again, this is how all these social media companies work. But TikTok seems to be prioritizing and refining the process to a greater degree. What my son was concerned about has nothing to do with China per se, but the ease of hacking. He feels TikTok's security is low, and given the amount of personal data that's shared, you can be targeted with messages that look like they're coming from (for example) your bank, your local government, a family member, etc. because hackers know what bank you use, where you live, who your relatives are, and much more. His advice was more along the lines of all social media is horrific and to stay away if possible, but TikTok is worse.

The problem isn't nuclear power, it's the waste that's generated. The US still hasn't figured out where to put the waste that's been generated in this country. Thin of it this way. If a plane had crashed in Chernobyl, there would have been a loss of life which would have been tragic. But it wouldn't have made Chernobyl uninhabitable for decades to come.

That depends. The direction of social media is downward - more crass, more mean-spirited, people bailing on Facebook, getting scammed, the "X" fiasco, etc. TikTok is king of the hill right now, but that too will fall prey to what happens when you open something up to the public and let anyone in. I don't know if it's related, but Musicplayer keeps gaining people. I'm sure part of it is because so many cool folks hang out here, but it also might be because the forum structure has been around for so long that it's being perceived as a breath of fresh air after being out of fashion for so long.

One of my instructional videos was banned from Instagram because it mentioned pink noise as a way to simulate listening to music in a car. Apparently they had a problem with the word pink. I kid you not. That algorithm must have seriously cut into videos mentioning Pink Floyd, The Big Pink, or Pink. Maybe I'll test the waters and post a video about watching the Pink Panther while listening to Music from Big Pink before going to a Pink Floyd tribute band, and see if Instagram implodes.

For what it's worth, my son is a specialist in cybersecurity. He says "Dad, most social media is a problem but whatever you do, avoid TikTok."