Absolutely true description! Thank you for this recap and for your acting which is really good! 👏🏻 hope these “fair use” “legit” AI companies will be limited by law soon. Because what is going on now is unfair.
The term "artificial" tells everyone its nature and limit: "art". It's not naturally occurring or otherwise, thus its a contrived creation of humans, not of nature, hence it's ultimate limitation: humans.
I joined Sync Academy to learn about Sync and connect with Sync artists and music libraries. As of late, Sync Academy is no longer about that. We haven’t seen a video about music production or any sync success stories. Originally this channel and this group was focused on a positive mindset towards achieving our goals but now it’s just constant AI videos and now it’s going in a negative way. I understand it is a potential threat to people like us but this is not why I joined.
Totally get it and I'm sorry you're not happy with all the focus on AI lately. I promise we will back to our normally scheduled program soon, but this issue is something that might render everything we're learning about how to succeed in Sync useless in the coming years. That's worth some serious time and focus (especially as someone who's guided many of our members into the world of Sync). I made this video about a year ago as to why this is a topic I feel compelled to cover in-depth: th-cam.com/video/d6KILV2F66s/w-d-xo.htmlsi=XllFT-5YDyJarIVT There's still 1000+ videos on my YT channel you can find on virtually any Sync topic you'd like. We still have 150+ hours of tutorials in Sync Academy as well. All of our resources are always there for you, regardless of what we are currently focusing on.
Maybe he could tell the "salesman" his little machine is out in the open, i.e. public, so its fair use for he himself to use it (ethically) as he sees fit as well. 😁
😂😂 You finally got your message across well done 👍 I think there should be a way to Compromise to better balance between the 2 sides for sure. Probably the best way is if you are a Artist Ai yourself and sell your Digital likeness or you will most likely be Irrelevant in the future of Ai
This is informative AND hilarious! Hey, Jesse, no worries for you; just pick up acting and you'll be good, just fine! (Oh, wait...yeah, actors - I guess not so safe after all. Oh, well!!😅)
Sorry for being off topic, but I just wanted to ask a newbie question (not AI related)- When it comes to concentrating on one genre but not everything sounding similar which I gather is considered best practice, could someone for example concentrate on "Retro 60s" but compose tracks that fit into different styles that were popular in the 1960s like RnB, Psychedelia etc?
That's THE question of our times right now. Most things are becoming optional so we'll have to really think about our reasons for doing things more and more.
hmmm, did the AI dude from Udio look that cool when he knocked on your door and told you he was taking your stuff ... along with 500 million other songs?
@@SyncMyMusic from 2:50 on, ok, I was commenting on the ipad with a bad connection, not very good research, but hey, I didn't have AI to help. Fair argument, but the closest analogy would be someone producing a kind of parody of someone's work - this uses the original sometimes quite closely, and the people who suffer what can at times become like ridicule - do they give permission? Is that why they write their (eg. postmodernist) theories that get rubbished by others? So if they decided, no you can't parody my thing if you read it in a library for free, would that change anyone's fair use? I'm just saying these arguments against AI are probably just good for funny and cool videos, but otherwise, they represent your personal distaste for these AI cowboys. Understandable, but my expectation is, people like you will actually use AI to produce even higher quality at the same price, rather than me producing the same quality at a lower price. That I will do, but it won't sell to top studios - it will be good for indie things. TL;DR: Ok, I hear you, but it's debatable, and I'm sure the real pros like you will survive this.
More analogies to help people understand...very nice.... artists are being kicked to the curb by software people ..that's all you need to know ... laws must provide property protections
That´s it, man, once you again you nailed it haha. Make multiple pieces of content for shorts, reels and Tik Tok also with this so we all have more to share and spread the word even more. Suno, Udio... straight up, this mofo´s should go down.
to be fair even if no one would sell their data you can still achieve the same with ai, it would just take longer because you would need to "generate" all the data yourself or with a group or what ever options you have, but any rate of progress will inevitbly end where we are now lol (also i get that your argument is you want consent and possibly compensation and i agree with that sentiment its just unfortunate the big companies care a bit less haha)
The way I view AI is more or less like the magnum opus of all human work and efforts throughout the ages, we should be proud of contributing to it's existence imo. But video is hilarious! ;d
Curiously, your representation of the "bad guys" of AI is quite far from reality, you were probably inspired by some record manager, interested only in profit. Instead, the AI people are scientific researchers, and they have always given me the impression of not knowing how to manage their affairs. For example, they appear among the most generous on the internet scene. When in Italy ChatGPT was blocked for a month by the government, they refunded me 2 months of subscription for a fault that was not theirs. Even Udio, for example, is giving away 10 credits a day for free users, but that's not true... you can use many more because they haven't put a check in! And I could say lots of examples they dont act as if they care to their businness. So the model here is not "Uncle Scrooge", but more "Ludwig von Drake", just to get the idea. If you want to make a parody, I suggest you represent them as hippies who act randomly but don't know what they're doing... it would be funny and closer to reality...
I know you have a personal bias about this AI because your career is threatened, and yes it will be destroyed if you do not adapt, but the bottom line is, AI generation is not much different than people being inspired by other people. Look at video games...PUBG got copied relentlessly, still is being copied relentlessly, by "inspired" clones. There are mockubusters...or there's movies with pretty much the exact same stories or scenes that are nearly identical to others in other movies; look at Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde there has been many different twists about that; Frankenstein, Dracula, then even with music there is Weird Al who uses the beats and melodies of existing songs; i.e. merely copying the works of other people without having to get the rights to do it. People rip people off, the only difference is that with the AI is it makes it easier to do. But this bias is creating an inability to objectively view the situation. It is Fair Use as much as talking over an existing video is, or people who play video games with no commentary. It will more than likely constitute as transformative; music sampling is even deemed Fair Use in certain cases and that's pretty much a straight rip of the content unaltered. There may be exceptions, but probably only for the biggest names that can afford the best legal team and can spend an insane amount of money to go to court. Suno and Udio are definitely banking on it being Fair Use as they stand to lose the most by allowing people to produce and sell the songs made with their software. That is a lot of risk which probably means they've run it through a legal team to speculate on the likelihood of risks; for them to go ahead with it means they were told the risk is minimal, if any, of infringement.
@@SyncMyMusic I never said I was capable of doing this. But I also wouldn't be able to manufacture millions of candy bars a day by myself for the record.
@@Ghost_Text He was trying to make the case it was copying other people's work and passing it off on their own...I believe my first comment covers that quite thoroughly and pointed out various ways how this can be done and many ways in which it has been done.
AI generation *is* different because it's not people being inspired by other people. It's a machine. It is not a person. This is a fact. You can't compare it because it is not a person and does not get 'inspired' like a person. This isn't one person making beats and samples on their laptop at home. This is a profit-seeking company seeking to make huge profits from the efforts of millions of people. That immediately puts it in a very different category when it comes to fair use law, not to mention common decency and ethics. Even Weird Al, who you bring up, seeks to get permission for songs he parodies - even if he doesn't have to. And besides that, the original writers of the songs receive royalties because the system was set up so that even if someone parodies your song, you still benefit as the original creator of the work. In the case of AI, are any of the original creators benefiting? I rest my case. I don't understand why people come to the defense of the indefensible. If you really think about it clearly, you simply cannot agree that the AI companies have acted in good faith. Even if they win their court cases, they still haven't acted in good faith.
Don't musicians put out music because they want people to listen to it? Copyright isn't listenright. It can prevent reproduction, not consumption. People have always had the right to study and learn from available information, including mathamatical analysis using machines. Seems like "you can't listen to music, if you'll learn from it"? If you release something in public, you don't have tha right or ability to keep it private anymore.
There is only so much a human being can learn simply by listening to music. I know a lot of people who listen to music everyday and can't play a single chord or even hum in tune. If the AI was truly intelligent, it wouldn't need human music. It could figure it out from zero, and fast forward the process. What we have instead is a plagiarising algorithm that exploits copyrighted data to generate cashflow for investors who want a fat margin. It's a shortcut needed by a machine that is only artificial and not truly intelligent.
You arent learning shit and neither is the AI model, theft is theft. Stop talking about the theoretical scenarios where an AI bro learns an art because that is exactly what isn't happening.
@@BerkmanHouse The deal is that music is supposed, by terms of service, only to be listened to. The CEO of Udio is neither listening to nor studying anything, only stealing, because it's the machine that processes the digital information. So the CEO of Udio is breaking law with his behaviour.
Man, I get it, AI is scary, but is that all this channel has become? I love your content and even paid for your course, but the non stop barrage of AI videos is grating. This is 15 straight AI videos; it’s been a month since you’ve made a video about the whole reason you started the channel.
Just did an entire video on why I got into sync and why I started this channel: th-cam.com/users/liveCVV6HcXtn-k?si=l3IVwNrRtsoqIho8 Maybe you’re only noticing the AI ones (kind of a big deal in our industry right now so it’s worth some attention)
Bro, if you’re in this industry we need someone like Jesse to stay up on this incredibly deep and fast changing landscape. I’m thankful he’s making this much content on AI.
Hotel fire alarms are very loud and annoying, but they're there for a reason. They're there to warn you of a fire and to possibly save your life! Same with AI and Jesse right now.
Better than academia jargon-filled 50 page paper on AI copyright ethics funded by an AI company
Absolutely true description! Thank you for this recap and for your acting which is really good! 👏🏻 hope these “fair use” “legit” AI companies will be limited by law soon. Because what is going on now is unfair.
Generative AI is amazing, but it’s also civilization’s most sophisticated plagiarism machine
The term "artificial" tells everyone its nature and limit: "art". It's not naturally occurring or otherwise, thus its a contrived creation of humans, not of nature, hence it's ultimate limitation: humans.
Beautifully illustrated point Jesse thank you
Brilliant! Hopefully this makes people think about the artists this is affecting!
I wish I could click the like button 100X. But that's a circular endeavor. Fantastic analogy and now we can train off your acting skills.
Genius. This hits the nail on the head. Hope it goes viral.
Awesome example!!
Brilliant and entertaining explanation of the current state of play with AI deep machine learning, copyrights and supposed ‘fair use’.
This is genius Jesse! Simple yet incredibly powerful message 🔥
YO!!!! This video is 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 definitely good to see some switch up 🔥🔥🔥🔥
Thanks now I need a clean shirt just spilled coffee from laughing so hard. 😎
Great illustration man
ha ha. that was good, Jesse, finally you lightened up! 😀 Excellent job presenting our current problem.
great analogy
Nice 👌🏻
I joined Sync Academy to learn about Sync and connect with Sync artists and music libraries. As of late, Sync Academy is no longer about that. We haven’t seen a video about music production or any sync success stories. Originally this channel and this group was focused on a positive mindset towards achieving our goals but now it’s just constant AI videos and now it’s going in a negative way. I understand it is a potential threat to people like us but this is not why I joined.
Totally get it and I'm sorry you're not happy with all the focus on AI lately. I promise we will back to our normally scheduled program soon, but this issue is something that might render everything we're learning about how to succeed in Sync useless in the coming years. That's worth some serious time and focus (especially as someone who's guided many of our members into the world of Sync).
I made this video about a year ago as to why this is a topic I feel compelled to cover in-depth:
th-cam.com/video/d6KILV2F66s/w-d-xo.htmlsi=XllFT-5YDyJarIVT
There's still 1000+ videos on my YT channel you can find on virtually any Sync topic you'd like. We still have 150+ hours of tutorials in Sync Academy as well. All of our resources are always there for you, regardless of what we are currently focusing on.
The words are in the Public Domain! 😂
Maybe he could tell the "salesman" his little machine is out in the open, i.e. public, so its fair use for he himself to use it (ethically) as he sees fit as well. 😁
That's on point 👌🏻
this made me LOL! nicely done!
Brilliant......Absolutely nailed it!
😂😂 You finally got your message across well done 👍 I think there should be a way to Compromise to better balance between the 2 sides for sure. Probably the best way is if you are a Artist Ai yourself and sell your Digital likeness or you will most likely be Irrelevant in the future of Ai
Hope you don't mind, I just fed this video into an A.I. to train it on making humorous skits. 😋
It was be a terrible product to put on the market. Lol
@@SyncMyMusic Well, it was a choice between that and training my psychology A.I. on how to recognize multiple personality disorder. 😆😆😆
great analysis you did and humor. congrats for this video
Really good!! *lol*
Very cool!
This is informative AND hilarious! Hey, Jesse, no worries for you; just pick up acting and you'll be good, just fine! (Oh, wait...yeah, actors - I guess not so safe after all. Oh, well!!😅)
So to be clear... Jesse hates tech. ;)
Finally, someone who gets me! 😂
Sorry for being off topic, but I just wanted to ask a newbie question (not AI related)- When it comes to concentrating on one genre but not everything sounding similar which I gather is considered best practice, could someone for example concentrate on "Retro 60s" but compose tracks that fit into different styles that were popular in the 1960s like RnB, Psychedelia etc?
Possibly, but I doubt that you'd be equally talented at multiple genres even within a decade. I would focus on one genre to get your foot in the door.
@@SyncMyMusic thanks
Software companies care their upcoming IPOs, stock options, and get rich buyouts...that's it
Great point 😄 wait so udio makes you cite them as a source?
Of course! You can't just take their hard work without crediting them! www.udio.com/terms-of-service
Not anymore: "New update. Paying customers no longer have to give credit to Udio on their songs."
@@BerkmanHouse wow, that’s brand new!
Honestly what's even the reason for living anymore when AI can just do it for you
That's THE question of our times right now. Most things are becoming optional so we'll have to really think about our reasons for doing things more and more.
BRILLIANT!!
hmmm, did the AI dude from Udio look that cool when he knocked on your door and told you he was taking your stuff ... along with 500 million other songs?
No, it appears he did it months ago without telling anyone.
@@SyncMyMusic how did you learn to write your thesis?
@@demneptune That was explained in the video
@@SyncMyMusic from 2:50 on, ok, I was commenting on the ipad with a bad connection, not very good research, but hey, I didn't have AI to help. Fair argument, but the closest analogy would be someone producing a kind of parody of someone's work - this uses the original sometimes quite closely, and the people who suffer what can at times become like ridicule - do they give permission? Is that why they write their (eg. postmodernist) theories that get rubbished by others? So if they decided, no you can't parody my thing if you read it in a library for free, would that change anyone's fair use? I'm just saying these arguments against AI are probably just good for funny and cool videos, but otherwise, they represent your personal distaste for these AI cowboys. Understandable, but my expectation is, people like you will actually use AI to produce even higher quality at the same price, rather than me producing the same quality at a lower price. That I will do, but it won't sell to top studios - it will be good for indie things.
TL;DR: Ok, I hear you, but it's debatable, and I'm sure the real pros like you will survive this.
More analogies to help people understand...very nice.... artists are being kicked to the curb by software people ..that's all you need to know ... laws must provide property protections
That´s it, man, once you again you nailed it haha. Make multiple pieces of content for shorts, reels and Tik Tok also with this so we all have more to share and spread the word even more. Suno, Udio... straight up, this mofo´s should go down.
to be fair even if no one would sell their data you can still achieve the same with ai, it would just take longer because you would need to "generate" all the data yourself or with a group or what ever options you have, but any rate of progress will inevitbly end where we are now lol (also i get that your argument is you want consent and possibly compensation and i agree with that sentiment its just unfortunate the big companies care a bit less haha)
At least he didnt light up the cigaret in the room…
You forgot the golden chain around the neck :))
😂😂😂🔥🔥🔥🔥
Commenting for the algorithm so more people see lol
Very well done Jesse! 👏🏽👍🏽
😅😂 interesting content
Love this!😂
10/10
dude just made a video for youtube cause he wont admit he hates tech :v
Psychotic Break?
Yes you've got great insights.
@@SyncMyMusic Sorry, just concerned!
@@ideedit right, that’s how people show concern.
@@SyncMyMusic
Well, if that's how you feel never mind!
My bad!
The way I view AI is more or less like the magnum opus of all human work and efforts throughout the ages, we should be proud of contributing to it's existence imo.
But video is hilarious! ;d
Be proud all you want! But some of us aren't feeling very proud to contribute to it right now.
@@SyncMyMusic Sure, I respect that.
Curiously, your representation of the "bad guys" of AI is quite far from reality, you were probably inspired by some record manager, interested only in profit. Instead, the AI people are scientific researchers, and they have always given me the impression of not knowing how to manage their affairs. For example, they appear among the most generous on the internet scene. When in Italy ChatGPT was blocked for a month by the government, they refunded me 2 months of subscription for a fault that was not theirs. Even Udio, for example, is giving away 10 credits a day for free users, but that's not true... you can use many more because they haven't put a check in! And I could say lots of examples they dont act as if they care to their businness. So the model here is not "Uncle Scrooge", but more "Ludwig von Drake", just to get the idea. If you want to make a parody, I suggest you represent them as hippies who act randomly but don't know what they're doing... it would be funny and closer to reality...
LOL
I know you have a personal bias about this AI because your career is threatened, and yes it will be destroyed if you do not adapt, but the bottom line is, AI generation is not much different than people being inspired by other people. Look at video games...PUBG got copied relentlessly, still is being copied relentlessly, by "inspired" clones. There are mockubusters...or there's movies with pretty much the exact same stories or scenes that are nearly identical to others in other movies; look at Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde there has been many different twists about that; Frankenstein, Dracula, then even with music there is Weird Al who uses the beats and melodies of existing songs; i.e. merely copying the works of other people without having to get the rights to do it.
People rip people off, the only difference is that with the AI is it makes it easier to do. But this bias is creating an inability to objectively view the situation. It is Fair Use as much as talking over an existing video is, or people who play video games with no commentary. It will more than likely constitute as transformative; music sampling is even deemed Fair Use in certain cases and that's pretty much a straight rip of the content unaltered. There may be exceptions, but probably only for the biggest names that can afford the best legal team and can spend an insane amount of money to go to court.
Suno and Udio are definitely banking on it being Fair Use as they stand to lose the most by allowing people to produce and sell the songs made with their software. That is a lot of risk which probably means they've run it through a legal team to speculate on the likelihood of risks; for them to go ahead with it means they were told the risk is minimal, if any, of infringement.
Cool, so you can personally generate 850,000 tracks a day?
@@SyncMyMusic I never said I was capable of doing this. But I also wouldn't be able to manufacture millions of candy bars a day by myself for the record.
@@GeorginaJungleJust a question though? Why do you think he used a college thesis as an example in the video?
@@Ghost_Text He was trying to make the case it was copying other people's work and passing it off on their own...I believe my first comment covers that quite thoroughly and pointed out various ways how this can be done and many ways in which it has been done.
AI generation *is* different because it's not people being inspired by other people. It's a machine. It is not a person. This is a fact. You can't compare it because it is not a person and does not get 'inspired' like a person.
This isn't one person making beats and samples on their laptop at home. This is a profit-seeking company seeking to make huge profits from the efforts of millions of people. That immediately puts it in a very different category when it comes to fair use law, not to mention common decency and ethics. Even Weird Al, who you bring up, seeks to get permission for songs he parodies - even if he doesn't have to. And besides that, the original writers of the songs receive royalties because the system was set up so that even if someone parodies your song, you still benefit as the original creator of the work. In the case of AI, are any of the original creators benefiting? I rest my case.
I don't understand why people come to the defense of the indefensible. If you really think about it clearly, you simply cannot agree that the AI companies have acted in good faith. Even if they win their court cases, they still haven't acted in good faith.
I dont understand, if you are interested in music, why dont use song as examples, instead talkin about other things.
Part 2 is in the works. That one will be about Music.
IMO The problem and issue is larger than music. It's more of a philosophical exercise in what's right/wrong, fair/unfair...Awesome work @SyncMyMusic!
Don't musicians put out music because they want people to listen to it? Copyright isn't listenright. It can prevent reproduction, not consumption. People have always had the right to study and learn from available information, including mathamatical analysis using machines. Seems like "you can't listen to music, if you'll learn from it"? If you release something in public, you don't have tha right or ability to keep it private anymore.
People, yes. For profit AI models? That wasn't part of the deal.
@@SyncMyMusic What deal? It's people who are studying these audio files using machines.
There is only so much a human being can learn simply by listening to music. I know a lot of people who listen to music everyday and can't play a single chord or even hum in tune. If the AI was truly intelligent, it wouldn't need human music. It could figure it out from zero, and fast forward the process. What we have instead is a plagiarising algorithm that exploits copyrighted data to generate cashflow for investors who want a fat margin. It's a shortcut needed by a machine that is only artificial and not truly intelligent.
You arent learning shit and neither is the AI model, theft is theft.
Stop talking about the theoretical scenarios where an AI bro learns an art because that is exactly what isn't happening.
@@BerkmanHouse The deal is that music is supposed, by terms of service, only to be listened to. The CEO of Udio is neither listening to nor studying anything, only stealing, because it's the machine that processes the digital information. So the CEO of Udio is breaking law with his behaviour.
Man, I get it, AI is scary, but is that all this channel has become? I love your content and even paid for your course, but the non stop barrage of AI videos is grating. This is 15 straight AI videos; it’s been a month since you’ve made a video about the whole reason you started the channel.
Just did an entire video on why I got into sync and why I started this channel:
th-cam.com/users/liveCVV6HcXtn-k?si=l3IVwNrRtsoqIho8
Maybe you’re only noticing the AI ones (kind of a big deal in our industry right now so it’s worth some attention)
Bro, if you’re in this industry we need someone like Jesse to stay up on this incredibly deep and fast changing landscape.
I’m thankful he’s making this much content on AI.
Hotel fire alarms are very loud and annoying, but they're there for a reason. They're there to warn you of a fire and to possibly save your life! Same with AI and Jesse right now.
@@SyncMyMusic please dont listen we need these ai videos
Funny...and not funny...