The current state of AI

[felis]

I know nothing about AI, but found this article very interesting:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/12/maga ... atgpt.html

[Milkman]

Does anyone know -- can I block an entire subforum? I have a tag Ive created, which I add all "AI" developers to, but I dont know how to block a whole subforum. Thanks in advance!

[enroe]

I know nothing about AI, but found this article very interesting:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/12/maga ... atgpt.html

A great article from the New York Times shows that AI is already the primary
technology used in some software areas. This will become increasingly
common in the future, because AI is simply faster than humans.

But other professions – lawyers, engineers, urban planners, doctors, etc. –
will also be affected: At first, AI is only an aid and tool, but then it will gradually
take over more and more complex functions that previously only humans could
perform.

The same will happen in music: Initially, many musicians are enthusiastic about
the tools and AI plugins. But entirely new platforms generate completely new,
truly good songs – simply from a lyric prompt. Major record labels then build
one or more musicians around these, naturally with AI support, and plan live
shows – also with AI support. For the consumer, nothing changes (except that
it all looks breathtakingly amazing) – but behind the scenes, everything is
realized with AI.

An AI or an AI application will never directly turn against us humans.
Because AI helps us – it "thinks" and "creates" for us!

And that is precisely the reason why AI will spread so widely, why almost
everyone will use AI, and why music companies will also make use of AI.

The impact of AI is therefore more subtle – it "helps" us humans. But
because it intervenes in all areas of government, companies, and society –
permeating them – it will fundamentally change everything. Even the
concepts of "making decisions" or "creating art" will change because it
will no longer be humans doing such things, but primarily AI.

The writer and philosopher Stanislaw Lem predicted as early as the 1960s
that every technological civilization will enter a phase in which it "invents" AI.
This will be — in the long run — the turning point in which civilization as a
whole is controlled by AI robots. Biological evolution will then be replaced by
mechanical evolution. It seems to me that we are standing at this threshold.

From our human perspective, the complete takeover will certainly take
several centuries. From a cosmic perspective, however, that's just a blink of
an eye.

[enroe]

Does anyone know -- can I block an entire subforum? I have a tag Ive created, which I add all "AI" developers to, but I dont know how to block a whole subforum. Thanks in advance!

Why do you want to put all AI threads and even an entire subforum on your
"ignore list"?

Is it that the whole AI trend disgusts you?

If this is the case: I feel the same way, provided that AI is used to creatively
generate new content that was actually - at least until now - reserved for
human artists.

A song created purely through a text prompt from an AI can no longer
possess anything truly human. Because all the emotions, the struggle for
every single note, the crafting of the hook, the lyrical message, the playing
of the instruments—all of that is completely absent! An AI song is merely
a software creation—devoid of any feeling or understanding.

And yet—and this is the dilemma—the AI-generated song is indistinguishable
from a song recorded by humans. And it is even presented by the relevant
music labels as "human" and probably "handmade" together with a musician.

The question is: Should we close our eyes to it, ignore the development – ​​
and let ourselves be completely overwhelmed by the AI ​​revolution? By
ignoring all information about it? Or even blocking forums?

The more information we have ourselves, the better we can take action
against it and demand regulations that, for example, restrict AI systems
in the creative field.

[Milkman]

Does anyone know -- can I block an entire subforum? I have a tag Ive created, which I add all "AI" developers to, but I dont know how to block a whole subforum. Thanks in advance!

Why do you want to put all AI threads and even an entire subforum on your
"ignore list"?

Is it that the whole AI trend disgusts you?

If this is the case: I feel the same way, provided that AI is used to creatively
generate new content that was actually - at least until now - reserved for
human artists.

Ive been in tech 35 years, 40 if you count my youth spent in unisys datacenters.

No. I dont even need an argument. If there is no "block/hide subforum", so be it.

[BertKoor]

Does anyone know -- can I block an entire subforum? I have a tag Ive created, which I add all "AI" developers to, but I dont know how to block a whole subforum. Thanks in advance!

Go here: https://www.kvraudio.com/account/#myforums
Ctrl-F "Machine" and tick "Excluded"

[pdxindy]

Does anyone know -- can I block an entire subforum? I have a tag Ive created, which I add all "AI" developers to, but I dont know how to block a whole subforum. Thanks in advance!

Yes, you can hide the Machine Learning and AI for Music Creation sub-forum

Go to the main forum index. Just above the forum list, there is a customize option. There you can hide or show whatever you want.

[zerocrossing]

I know nothing about AI, but found this article very interesting:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/12/maga ... atgpt.html

This sort of thing actually makes sense to me. A machine communicating with a programming language? Of course it would work, especially if the desired result is well defined and documented.

Human language? Not so much. Yesterday, I had an interesting event. I got a message that one of my daughter’s friends commented on one of her Google docs. I went to the doc and read it. It was pretty good, for a 7th grader. Dystopian science fiction. Pretty derivative, but who’s coming up with unique ideas in 7th grade.

I asked her about it this morning. She brightly responded that she was just messing around with the Google AI feature, and she got frustrated with it and gave up, because while it came up with something, it was often not what she asked for, and prompts to fix it usually made it worse and had it change other bits that she had gone in and wrote herself. She said that she was about half way through rewriting it herself, so the bit I’d read was actually her writing. (I only read the first two paragraphs, as I discovered it late.)

What I found interesting was that her experience was identical to my first experience with Midjourney. Sure, it produced some interesting things that looked ok, mostly, but never really what I wanted. It’s because, unlike a software feature, which either does what you want or doesn’t, there is no precisely defined “correct” end state for art.

It’s also why I don’t consider my use of Synthesizer V on par with other generative AI music tools. Dreamtonics provides microscopic control of nearly every aspect of each synthetic utterance that I never feel like I can’t mold it into what I want. There are a few things that I can’t get it to do, like convincingly whisper, but that’s very minor to my final vision. I can easily add that myself.

Again, I’ll add that I always ask for human collaboration on any project that I do. So far, I have zero takers, so I’m not really replacing anyone with technology. I’m about to add a sitar part to a project later, and while I’d love to have someone do it for real, I will use a sample based instrument. I’m sure it won’t be exactly what I want, or would have played myself if I knew how to play the sitar, or had one to play, but I’ll accept that, unless someone comes along and offers to replace it. I’m not holding my breath. I can barely get anyone to listen to my tracks as it is.

[felis]

The main thing I got from the article is that when it comes to programming, it can do very well with small, isolated requests,
but loses the big picture (or gets sidetracked) when asked for a large project.
It needs guidance, explicit directions, and a clear vision of the desired result.

[Milkman]

Does anyone know -- can I block an entire subforum? I have a tag Ive created, which I add all "AI" developers to, but I dont know how to block a whole subforum. Thanks in advance!

Go here: https://www.kvraudio.com/account/#myforums
Ctrl-F "Machine" and tick "Excluded"

Thank you.

[stratology]

This is purely subjective, but it seems to me that there is a general decline in software quality, an increase in bugginess and weird behaviors, across the board. I'm wondering if that is, at least partly, due to AI assisted coding.

Case in point: macOS Tahoe is the worst macOS I have ever experienced by a mile, and I've use Apple operating systems since (Classic) Mac OS 8.

I am an unapologetic technology enthusiast, but whenever I try AI tools (like chatbots), I am completely baffled by how poor the quality is. I've tried some vibe coding, the Swift code was so flawed it wouldn't even compile.

My working assumption is that AI assisted code tools produce a good percentage of faulty code. If a developer is highly experienced, and is willing to go over AI generated code line by line to verify there is nothing wrong, it may be useful.

If it is used unchecked as a tool to save time, I'd expect the worst.

[BONES]

The writer and philosopher Stanislaw Lem predicted as early as the 1960s that every technological civilization will enter a phase in which it "invents" AI. This will be — in the long run — the turning point in which civilization as a whole is controlled by AI robots. Biological evolution will then be replaced by mechanical evolution. It seems to me that we are standing at this threshold.

Human evolution ceased centuries ago, we are now devolving, as we've taken the imperative of natural selection, survival of the fittest, out of the equation. In fact, these days it is the least fit of us who to tend to breed more, so overall we are going backwards as a species. AI might accelerate that trend but our species' best days are definitely behind us now.

A song created purely through a text prompt from an AI can no longer possess anything truly human. Because all the emotions, the struggle for every single note, the crafting of the hook, the lyrical message, the playing of the instruments—all of that is completely absent!

Sorry to burst your bubble but that bullshit has been absent from my creative process since I began. Nothing about song writing has ever been any kind of struggle, simply the result of f**king about until something pops out that sounds good. Most song writing is largely formulaic, we all use standardised structures, we all use chords and progressions, consciously or not. The thought that it's any kind of struggle is laughable.

An AI song is merely a software creation—devoid of any feeling or understanding.

Also laughably wrong. Ai understands human emotion and how that manifests in music better than you ever will. It's listened to and analysed more music that you, it's read more books on the subject than you and, properly guided by a human made prompt, will have no trouble expressing any emotion you might want it to. If you can't manage to get the right emotions from an AI generated song, that's only because you don't understand human emotion well enough to guide the AI, or you lack the ability to explain it.

And yet—and this is the dilemma—the AI-generated song is indistinguishable
from a song recorded by humans.

Which completely disproves the point you were just trying to make, doesn't it?

The more information we have ourselves, the better we can take action against it and demand regulations that, for example, restrict AI systems in the creative field.

If AI was as you suggest, why would regulation be necessary? You're all over the place with it.

[vurt]

evolution didn't cease. thousands of years from now, there will be archaeologists, talking about how we were taller/shorter than them, had longer arms or bigger heads, whatever...

you just don't see it happening outside of some insects that spawn several generations over a few weeks.

[stratology]

Human evolution ceased centuries ago, we are now devolving, as we've taken the imperative of natural selection, survival of the fittest, out of the equation. In fact, these days it is the least fit of us who to tend to breed more, so overall we are going backwards as a species. AI might accelerate that trend but our species' best days are definitely behind us now.

There is a common misunderstanding of what 'survival of the fittest' means.

It does not mean survival of the physically strongest, most violent, most ruthless.

'Fittest' means most adaptable to change.

Survival of the fittest means survival of the ones that are most adaptable to change.

[Bunny_boy]

There is a common misunderstanding of what 'survival of the fittest' means.

Plus there are specific environmental adaptations in humans, such as on the island of St Kilda and in the Andes.