No.3031[Reply]
With the advent of AI technology spreading across the wired, there are an almost unlimited amount of examples that point to the idea that "dead internet theory" may no longer be a theory but a practical reality. Digital spaces, primarily social media (x, tiktok, instagram, reddit, youtube), have been flooded with scraped, copy pasted, inauthentic, and repetitive "content" that lacks substance. Most of this is at the hands of large language models, bot traffic and algorithms being manipulated for specific interests, but the widespread adoption of this technology has led to artificial posts, massive amounts of misinformation, forced interactions, and digital ecosystems that operate without human input with the goal of exploiting any real person who engages with them. Social apps, linguistics, search engines, journalism, video games, art, software programs, operating systems, nearly everything is in the midst of an authenticity crisis; don't even get me started on AI "relationships". One could argue that the mechanisms pushing the internet towards this direction have been in place since at least the early 2010s, but seeing this artificial content is unavoidable on the modern internet, specifically on the popular avenues that most people who use the internet inhabit. Also, it is mandatory to mention the obvious government involvement. Despite all of this, it seems to be a common sentiment to many users that this is a bad development.
Personally, I have deleted my socials and restricted most of my internet usage to specific websites and applications that have small enough communities to still feel authentic and capable of discussion. It is hard for me to take any new information seriously when so much slop is generated and pushed for narratives while undermining the integrity of hear-say and what you can observe with your own eyes. It all feels like a giant cyberpunk blackpilled psy-op. So what does wirechan think? is the internet dead? can we avoid the dead internet at large? is it time to setup up an intranet and hermitmaxx? is it futile to resist this inevitability? are we all turning into schizos? what are the implications of this? pic unrelated.
4 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view. No.3037
>>3036sentient nameroll. oh well
No.3038
>>3032>>3035That's more or less what I was going for. Humans have been attempting to embody machines in their art for some time now, and it seems very odd to me that everyone is so up in arms now that actual machines are doing the art. It's as though they did not really want the logical end of the world they were building. I remember when procedurally generated djent songs first hit some time ago:
https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=CqvmUnG25dA . You can see the comments about it when it came out were ecstatic. They recognized this as the pinnacle of what they had been working towards ever since the term "djent" was coined: machine generated music. The human element had been completely removed, and the music quality improved significantly for them because of it. I just don't understand why, again say Zwitter furry artists, did not have the same reaction towards procedurally generated furry art when they go into their art with the same mindset as the djent people do.
>>3036Any response would depend on how you define emotion vs. feeling. People still have emotion, obviously, but the modern Western society as a whole discourages feeling it. You are right that a lot of anti-internet talk comes from a place of elitism or superiority in ignorance though. Even my own, I suppose.
No.3039
>>3038i'm obviously a bit too young to have an informed opinion on this but i think western society has been discouraging feeling emotions for decades now, mostly due to the ideas of responsibility and separating your business life from your personal life, i guess to achieve your american dream even if it takes all the SSRIs in the world to get there
also, in response to the machine-generated djent thing, i remember that vid coming out and i mostly interpreted it as a critique of how formulaic modern metal sounded (and still sounds), there's a reason why AI back then wasn't able to generate something like folk
No.3040
>>3038>The human element had been completely removed, and the music quality improved significantly for them because of itHow was the human involvement removed? It required lots of effort and curation and taste to pull it off.
>I just don't understand why, again say Zwitter furry artists, did not have the same reaction towards procedurally generated furry art when they go into their art with the same mindset as the djent people doThe djent people being randoms leaving comments? I'm not sure how actual djent artists reacted.
No.3041
>>3040Of course a lot of human effort etc. was involved. It's just that the curation is geared towards removing the human involvement. The taste people have is one that decries human involvement. I don't know that appealing to an elitist sense of "the artists" means anything. The "randoms" you mention are all people that enjoy the music and listen to it regularly. A lot of them are likely write their own songs. Even if every major band decried this, it's clear that the popular opinion is in favor of this kind of stuff. For what it's worth, here's Nik Nocturnal reacting to it, after looking at a few other AI music streams:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSlGuYQMTyQ&t=164sI did overestimate how much people cared about this, though. When this first came out (see the linked video) people were crazy ecstatic about this, but the diving back into things now, the original guy's livestream and YouTube channel are both dead, and no replicates seem to have emerged.
>>3039In light of that, maybe you're right. Maybe this was some Harvard experiment to see how people would react to properly made procedurally generated music. ha.