this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2026
282 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
83963 readers
4074 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If I steal someone else’s song and put my name on it nobody reasonable would say I made it.
This whole AI-art fucktrain is entirely propped up by people who never made art before suddenly thinking they know something.
People were saying the same thing about sampling in hip hop. Yeah if you do a 1 to 1 copy of a song then that's not making art but if you take elements from a song and rearrange them then that is.
My issue is more about not calling it music. Imo, if it's groovy and my brain enjoys it, it's music.
There's some music I seriously don't enjoy as well but I still consider it music because someone does.
That being said, I don't label AI stuff as "made". I'm quick with making the distinction when sharing with friends and stuff. I agree with that part. Although it becomes blurry at times. Making something with samples is still making it, what about making it with AI generated samples? I don't consider it stealing in any case, much too transformative imo.
I think we should separate the platforms but I'm not sure where certain things should land. It's all music for me though.
Thanks for taking the time to explain yourself! I wanted to jump in to potentially clear up a difference of semantics, y'all are just using different interpretations of a phrase and I think it's worth exploring.
If I take the person you originally replied to and continue the thought on my own, I think "it shouldn't be called music" is trying to express that "this content should be fundamentally distinct from music because it displaces artists who, as a group, are finding it increasingly hard to sustain themselves on their art alone".
If your relationship with music stops at something to tap your foot to, then you may or may not appreciate the value music has for society in the form of things like expression, protest, criticism, unity, and faith. Every time we listen to a bot-generated song, it takes a listen away from a human artist and pushes us toward a world eventually devoid of those artistic contributions.
Whether or not it fits into the same musical category as human-generated media isn't really the point worth talking about (it's trained on that after all, of course it's similar!). What we need is a way to keep it from displacing human-generated art, and I don't think calling it music or not is enough.