You got it. You went from why would artist use AI to I use AI in my work. My argument the entire time has been AI will be able to reduce cost or labor in entertainment. I said artist will take advantage of the technology as you said you do. I further said consumers would accept or in some cases not know the difference enlarge. Although what you seem to be describing doesn't sound like AI. I use Excel at work. That doesn't mean I'm using AI. It's just a normal computer program. Excel has introduced AI to the program though. You furthered one of my points by saying you are involved in creating music more than just being a DJ. Your ear is different than most of us here on the board. We aren't listening to songs the same way as you.
My comparison is correct. My statement wasn't about the technology. It was about you (Blockbuster) not seeing the change that is happening in front of you and not believing it is a threat to your business. I would be Netflix who saw the potential in home delivery of DVDs and went on to embrace streaming. By the time Blockbuster acknowledged the threat to their business and tried to adapt it was too late. Worse they had the opportunity to buy Netflix and Blockbuster is dead today.the focus is the mindset of the organizations and embracing innovation or not.
Artist have had opportunities outside of rap since the 90s if not 80s. Yes, it's increased to new levels but that doesn't change the fact that this isn't new. There is a difference from people wanting to be artist because they love their craft and those who primarily enter for money and clout. The same applies to every industry or career. There are people who will work for nothing because they love what they do be it doctor, lawyer, teacher or computer programmer. They actively try to improve their skills and stay up to date on changes in their fields. Taking it back to rappers, there are some who blantly say rap is a hustle for them and it's not necessarily a love for the art. Those are the artist who will willingly use AI to reduce the work. Others will use AI like ghostwriters, reference tracks or writing camps to get ideas. The AI could create something that is good enough to use as is.like I said before the person who isn't a studio rat will let AI do the heavy lifting. I don't know how Travis Scott did the concert in Fortnite, but maybe moving forward it will all be AI. The same way Soldierboy used a computer program from home to create his first hit, someone will use AI to do the same. People will see the success, learn how to do it and follow the trend as always.
Your argument started with a terrible Drake ripoff made by AI. You said that because this bad copy was passable to people who are not fans or serious music listeners eventually the tech would progress to the point that the rapper is no longer necessary. Especially since most modern rappers only care about money and are not true artists anyway.
How does my last comment prove that point?
You further said that AI would get so good at analyzing actors that eventually an AI Denzel would be better than the real thing.
I said the opposite and stand by it.
I agree that AI is useful, but mainly in ways that enhance an artist's work, not replace it all together. I don't believe AI will ever have the capacity to do this for a number of reasons that I've already discussed.
Your Blockbuster argument ignores context. Netflix offered themselves for sale in 2000. At that point the dot com bubble had just burst and most people didn't have the internet or DVD players.
So why would the biggest video store rental chain in the country want to buy a company in a failing industry utilizing technology most people don't use to get movies they have to wait a week to watch?
For further context, Netflix started home streaming in 2007. A year later Hollywood writers went on strike to demand a bigger share of DVD royalties. They never mentioned streaming which means it wasn't just Blockbuster who didn't see the potential. The people who made the content used by Netflix didn't see it either.
Granted, Blockbuster eventually reached an adapt or perish moment and by the time they did it was too late. However, that's the other flaw in this comparison. AI is nowhere near that point and for most applications it never will.
Back to my automated fast food comparison, many restaurants restaurants benefited by embracing automatic kiosks. Many more didn't and they're still doing fine. Same applies to stem separation in music.
I should point out that I was already making clean versions of songs decades before this technology came out. The only difference now is that I don't need an instrumental to do it. Likewise, plenty of artists who don't perform or compose music with computers and synthesizers are still doing fine.
Yes, rappers have taken on lanes like acting since the 1980s. Back then they were limited to bit parts and low budget movies. The only exceptions were household names like Will Smith, or trained actors like Tupac. For the rest it was barely worth considering. However, since 2008 the landscape as completely changed.
Yes, some rappers call their music a hustle, but back in 1992 Rakim said rap was his job. If one of the greatest MCs who ever lived can view his work this way then modern hustlers can still create great art as well.
Full disclosure, I see DJing as a hustle. The money I make allows me to spend eight hours a day honing my craft instead of punching a clock. It doesn't cheapen my art, it enhances it.