Originally Posted by MusicVillain
You probably didn't have a chance to read my last post before it was gone. I was referring "woke mobs", not to anyone on this forum, but to those million dollars net worth AI company executives in California, for their bullying behaviors on censoring free speech and violation of first amendment.
I read all your posts before they were removed.

First of all, what the companies are doing is not "censoring free speech and violation of first amendment". The First Amendment to the US Constitution states:

Originally Posted by "First Amendment"
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This only applies to laws passed by the US Congress, not corporations. Corporations are free to create whatever restrictions they want.

Even given this, the US Courts have found that not all free speech is protected by the First Amendment. Exceptions are made for:

  • True threats (speech that could be perceived as an immediate threat to someone's safety)
  • Obscenity and child pornography
  • Speech that incites imminent lawless action


Finally, there aren't "mobs" of CEOs. The term "woke mobs" refers to groups of people to put pressure on others - in this case, the US public demanding that CEOs implement censorship in AI.

I was drawing an analogy to people demanding AIs not generate obscenity with those same forces here on this forum complaining about you posting what they considered to be obscenities.

If your measure of "wokeness" is that they demand censorship of obscenities, by implication the people on this forum are equally "woke" in demanding censorship when you write the same offensive materials here.

I argue that neither are "woke". The creation of material that is offensive will, by defniition, generate that response.

Quote
In my last post, I was simply arguing: If Freddie Mercury can point a bullet launching device to someone's head, pull the activating mechanism, in his song "Bohemian Rhapsody", and achieve great success, why can't I point the same device, to the head of a Russian Whoquer?

First things first - there is nothing preventing you from writing the lyrics yourself, just like Freddy did. After all, he didn't use AI, did he?

The lyric in "Bohemian Rhapsody" can reasonably be considered offensive. After all, it's there for shock value. But the context is entirely different - it's an over-the-top opera, a parody.

Many critics at the time very much disliked "Bohemian Rhapsody". They considered it too long, and too over the top.

You complain that AI won't give the sort of detail to lyrics that gangsta rap demands. In your example, you explain that it's important that AI be able to generate salacious content.

  • It's not just some random person who was shot, it's a prostitute.
  • But "prostitute" is too tame a term - the AI must be able to generate a slur.
  • And singer has to brag he's had s** with her, too!
  • And not just any sort act, but one that degrades, objectifies and shows masculine dominance.


By doing this, you are ensuring that you'll offend as much of the general public as possible. Certainly the reaction on the forum - which we agree is not a "woke mob" - demonstrates this.

The song is designed to offend the general audience, and thus never reach the sort of "great success" that "Bohemian Rhapsody" achieved.

Quote
Why is modern AI so bigot towards rapping culture?
Because rapping culture is based on creating lyrics that are intended to offend. If you create material that is intentionally offensive, it's reasonable to expect people to be offended.

Modern AI isn't a "bigot" to rapping culture. AI censors offensive output.

Rapping culture is built on writing offensive lyrics.

The conflict comes from rapping culture, not the other way around.

Quote
The lyrics I shared in my last post, generated by a 7 billion parameter Facebook Llama model, should not be labeled as "inappropriate and offensive", but really should be considered as "work ethic". In case you don't know, a successful gangsta rapper must keep a strong "work ethic", to ensure every song he releases includes crimes, eroticism, addictive chemicals, launching devices, and violence.
You've already stated that gangsta rap lyrics are NSFW - another term for "inappropriate".

While some people claim that gangsta rap glorifies a work ethic, the work it glorifies must also be taken into account. A work ethic promoting violence, drug use, and glorifying the gang lifestyle is one that promotes activities that are understood to be offensive.

Quote
The most offensive and unethical thing, for a gangsta rapper to do, is writing boring lyrics, and ruining the experience of your audiences.

Gangsta rap is a sub-genre of hip-hop. It's a niche market that by your own definition aims to create lyrics which are offensive to the average person on the street.

Just because there's a market for something - for example, snuff films - doesn't change the fact that the material is offensive.

Quote
Ask yourself, imagine all of a sudden, James Bond has a self-righteous spiritual awakening, and decides to stop killing people or sleeping with Bond girls, will you still be interested in watching his movies anymore?
That's an interesting comparison, but I think it strengthens my argument instead of weakening it.

Certainly, Bond films are have gratuitous sex and violence. But they are carefully crafted to stay within the range of publicly accepted norms. After all, the films go before review boards, and for the sake of reaching a large audience, they need to achieve a PG-13 rating. They intentionally perform self-censorship, although many have rightly argued they push the envelope and should be rated higher than PG-13.

In contrast, you create lyrics that insist on going outside these norms, and you chafe at any sort of censorship.

While you have every right to do that, you don't have any sort of right to expect that corporations or the general public will take any action to assist you. After all, your lyrics as designed to offend.

-- David Cuny
My virtual singer development blog

Vocal control, you say. Never heard of it. Is that some kind of ProTools thing?