TimR

No. The rest of us needed someone clever to spot it as well. 🤣

Conversely, I've just had an hour long meeting with a couple of people I don't know very well on a personal level. We discussed something very important to all of us and required every ounce of my emotional intelligence to learn and pick up on their micro body language and inferred language. I'm ready to go back to bed. I certainly couldn't do that regularly for very long. When machines have learned to do that, we are in trouble. Until machines learn to do that, they are not going to be much of a problem to us.

I would say the first three hours of my weekday, every day, is exactly the same and can be done on autopilot. I suggest most people are the same.

A lot of what we think of as human intelligence is just accessing a database. Very little of what we do requires actual intelligence*. *Luckily, or most people wouldn't survive longer than a day

I can't imagine anyone employing people to sit a desk all day, looking at the music you like and then working out what other music you would like. For a start, no human would have that massive encyclopedic knowledge of songs and genres, including album tracks etc. Certain jobs/processes are only possible and have been created because of AI. I suspect this will be the better use. Self driving cars, where one accident can be analysed and then the scenario be exported to all the other self driving cars so they don't make the same mistake, unlike human drivers who all seem to make the same mistakes over and over again and never learn from either themselves or others.

A lot of kids are being taught programming by assembling pre built units, that do things, together. We should remember that a lot of programming we do, if we are using a language is also assembling things that other people have already written for us. No one writes in binary or assembler. Very few of us have built our own amplifiers, leads, guitars. We all rely on the donkey work being already done for us. It just depends on what level of individual human input you're comfortable with. Seems most of us draw the line at the actual performance. There's some very interesting music created from received telescopic data by NASA's Sonification project. I think all AI produce should be labelled as such.

Wood isn't magnetic though?

Before the days the internet really got going I received an email reveiw from a 'producer' who had been at one of our gigs. I'm sure he was trying to be helpful. I read it several times before replying - "Thanks for your email." In hindsight I think that was 4 words too many.

"And this next one is one that my computer wrote earlier"...

Not really. There's no actual skill in assembling something the same over and over again. Practically anyone who has ever worked on a production line can do it. They have children doing it in some countries. I used to put bottles on a conveyor belt in a bottling plant. No skill, just a bad back. Robots do it now, thank god. This is why AI will only replace certain mundane tasks.

That's basically replacing a key requirement of what it means to be a musician. Although it will be interesting if it can do that in real time with other musicians and then improvise.

Quite. It's only free while we do their Beta testing for them.

It's the new world order. We all become one assimilated culture all speaking the same language, living by the same rules, using the same currency, eating the same food. I think there's a book about it.

Quite. The CGI should enhance the storyline, not be the whole film. AI in music should be there to do the same. Improve, not replace.

Friends often come along. My son is keen (he plays drums) but he's now living and working abroad. My wife has been to one gig since we got married (nearly 30 years ago).