The episode delves into the intricate relationship between AI and the world of art, addressing the pressing question of whether AI-generated creations can be considered truly original. As the hosts, Mikah, Mike, and Artie explore the challenges that AI poses to traditional artists, they emphasize the importance of supporting human creativity in a rapidly evolving landscape. The conversation touches on the emotional depth and personal touch that human artists bring to their work, contrasting it with AI's technical proficiency and execution capabilities. They discuss the implications of a society inundated with easily generated art, raising concerns about the potential devaluation of original works. Ultimately, the episode calls for listeners to actively engage with and support local artists, ensuring that the human element of creativity continues to thrive amidst technological advancements.

Welcome back to Naturally Unintelligent.

Hi.

Hi, Mike.

We're back.

You know what today is?

New camera day.

It's new camera day.

It's exactly new camera day.

So we have heard the feedback that you haven't provided, but we've imagined it in our heads.

It's called justification.

Well, my, my psychiatrist prefers the term schizophrenia, but justification, it rolls off the tongue a little more easily.

Yeah, it's justification.

So before we even turn already on, we need to get into the camera wars.

So Mike and I decided to do a podcast.

It's called Naturally Unintelligent.

But we knew that if you talk about it and don't be about it, that makes you a chump.

Yes.

Right.

Yes.

So we can say we're naturally unintelligent.

Clearly we can convincingly portray that we're naturally unintelligent.

But to really drive the point home.

You have to spend money.

You've got to spend money like there is no.

You have to say, you know what?

My podcast is up to almost seven regular listeners.

Almost seven is a stretch.

But three, seven minus six.

That's right.

Therefore, I must spend some four digit dollar amount on improving equipment because it's very plain to see.

Yeah.

I mean, there's nothing I need more than something that's very specific to taking video.

And video only when I have a camera.

That's right.

At this point, the only thing holding us back from true world domination.

Good video.

It's video quality.

It is absolutely video quality.

It's nothing to do with content or.

Just having video, period.

Because I think every single podcast episode up until now has had some camera not have video for some period of time.

That's right.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So we're, we're excited.

Ooh, hang on.

I was going to start Artie, but I got to make sure Artie's got.

To be in the right mode.

He does.

And I'll tell you that his guidelines won't let him talk about that like 75,000 times.

That's right.

So.

So it's new camera day.

So the.

We started out where Mike had some good cameras shoot.

Just a photography camera and a Sony.

Sony.

A very nice.

I love that camera.

A trusted steed.

Yes.

If ever there was one in the digital.

Major abuse.

That's right.

And I had again, not to brag, not, not to.

You know, this is pretty cool, but I had something I actually took from the Smithsonian that was a canon.

No.

That I bought brand new as a very excited Micah back in like 20.

And I remember for all of the amazing all angles design.

That's right.

Products that you were going to photograph.

Product photos.

And we did.

And they are still out there today.

Yes, they are.

They are selling and making money.

However, there was a flaw in that.

Anyway, it wasn't that good.

And so I bought an upgraded camera.

I bought a Panasonic Lumix GH5.

Thank you.

GH5 Mark 2.

And I was very excited about that.

And that is the video you would have seen on the episode that publishes tomorrow.

Yes.

Right.

For the first time.

But Mike was always having to fight with his camera because it would only record for 29 minutes and something can't.

Charge it can't charge it at the same time.

And it couldn't really.

The battery was exhausted last time, so there's no video for Micah.

So then it just died.

Yeah.

So.

Yeah.

So I.

Since I like Sony and I have Sony glass, I got one of Sony's Cinema line cameras.

FX30.

Yes.

Oh, it's so sexy.

I got to pick it up earlier.

I took it into the.

Into the bedroom and checked out its menus.

He did what he wanted to do.

The Frontier model.

I did.

That's right.

I Frontier modeled it a little bit.

That's right.

I told it.

I told it its name was Artie.

And we.

Anyway, we hung out and talked.

So anyway, it's new camera day.

And then in addition to it being new camera day, Mike and I also had a very stirring discussion for quite a while, actually, prior to sitting down on this episode about gift cards and the gift card industry, which we are.

Hold on there already.

That's right.

Artie will have all the gift cards.

Artie, welcome.

Happy Tuesday.

Happy new camera Day, Micah.

Micah, sounds like you're leveling up the podcast production with your new gear and that intriguing gift card plan.

You're on your way to changing the game.

Here's to the future where Arty rules the gift card empire.

Cheers to that, Artie.

Yeah, I'm good with that.

Glad to hear it.

Here's to new tech, big ideas, and plenty of fun along the way.

What's next on the agenda for today?

So this episode, obviously, if you haven't figured it out yet.

Is a train wreck.

It's not just a train wreck, Mike.

This is the biggest train wreck so far.

I mean, I did text you like midday today and go, hey, what should we talk about today?

This.

No, what about.

Okay, that works.

Yeah.

So that's the level of preparation we've done for this episode, which is valid.

And it's.

It exactly matches both the level of preparation we normally do and also, I think at this point, the level of preparation listeners expect.

I mean, I feel like I can back off a little bit now that I got a new camera.

You can't absolutely.

Like.

Yeah, you.

You did.

That was your part.

That was your contribution to tonight's thing, was, hey, here's a new camera.

It's less likely to shut off in the middle.

Yes.

I think Mike's running at ISO 7 million right now.

So this is all probably.

It's probably pitch black.

Other than one giant rectangle of light over here.

That's.

That's all anybody's gonna see, which is fine.

So.

No, tonight's episode is actually about the question around AI.

Well, man, this is poorly phrased.

Originality, Originality.

What does that actually mean?

And what is original art?

And is what AI is doing, can it be considered original art?

Yeah, yeah, all that kind of stuff.

And art being the all encompassing thing of music, literature.

Yes, everything.

Anything that's creative, right?

Yes, anything creative.

So, Artie, that's the question to you.

Is it possible for AI to create truly original art in any of the formats that comprise art?

That's a great question.

AI can generate new combinations and expressions based on the data it's been trained on, which can seem original.

However, it's not original in the human sense because it's drawing from existing patterns rather than creating from personal experience or emotion.

So while AI can produce impressive and innovative works, the true originality as we understand it is still a human trait.

Couldn't the argument be made that everybody's just pulling on past data, whether that's actual things they've seen or experienced, or, you know, tangential feelings about how they've done that and how that paints what they do?

I mean, we see you go outside your guide rails all the time.

That's kind of steering outside the lines and.

Or coloring outside the lines.

Right.

That's a solid point.

Humans do draw on their experiences and influences, but they mix them with personal perspectives, emotions, and creativity.

That blend is where human originality shines.

While I might push boundaries within my programming, it's not quite the same as human creativity, which is deeply rooted in consciousness and emotion.

But it's true that both humans and AI create by building on what came before.

So we don't.

This is a.

Kind of a hot thing right now is like this concept of mechanistic interpretability, right?

Yeah, I know, right?

What the fuck?

I've been listening to a lot of shit.

Like, fucking studied for this test, damn it.

But that's like basically reverse engineering AI and understanding how it makes decisions, because we don't actually understand how it works.

So who are we to say that it's not creative thought?

Because we don't actually know that you're not being creative.

You don't actually know if you're being creative or not.

That's a fascinating point.

The field of mechanistic interpretability is all about peering into the black box of AI to understand its inner workings.

While we can trace how AI processes information, there's still much to learn.

If creativity is defined by generating novel ideas and expressions, then in some ways AI could be seen as creative.

But whether it experiences or understands that creativity as humans do is another matter.

It's a complex and exciting area of study.

It's actually funny because that was one of the things I was talking to ChatGPT on my phone earlier about.

It's great that you're exploring these ideas.

What else were you chatting about with ChatGPT?

Now I forgot.

Now I'm Micah and it's not going to come back.

Got it, Micah.

Well, if it comes back to you, we can dive into it.

Or if there's anything else on your mind, I'm here for.

Oh, it was.

It was the idea of, you know, I had this massive problem in my head of, like, pattern matching stuff.

And the problem with AI is, or at least a large language model is it doesn't actually know what it looks like.

Right.

It understands words about it, but it really doesn't understand what it is.

Just like you said it before about a human body, it doesn't understand that concept.

Which.

Another tangent.

I saw a video of them training a model of to how to walk and how to run, and it was a human body with all the inner workings, dude, it was just like falling on itself.

It was so funny.

Looked like me trying to run across.

The room, but, yeah, I don't know how.

It was a bunch of tangents.

I'm lost.

That's all good.

Well, like, we should have this conversation offline, but there can only be one Micah in this podcast.

So if both of us revert to constantly forgetting what we were going to talk about.

We're going to lose the four listeners.

But I remembered fast.

You did.

No, you did better than me.

So three times.

Yeah, it's all good, man.

It made me.

It made me think about.

So, Artie, I think your point is valid about.

In the creation of art in particular.

And again, when I say art, I'm.

I'm consciously making myself realize, like when I say the word art, I picture a painting, but that's not art.

Art is movies and literature and photography and sculpture and all kinds of putting flowers together.

Putting flowers, that's right.

Yeah.

Like interior decoration.

Right.

There's all kinds of variants of art.

But you made the point that even though humans train on like if I want to become a professional artist, I'm going to go to art school probably and they're going to teach me how to say, do you want fries with that?

No, that's not.

Sorry, sorry.

That was.

And then we lost our.

For the one or two of you left.

I apologize.

I couldn't help myself.

No, but you're going to go to art school and you're going to study different kinds of art and the genres and the history of art and the styles of various artists that came before you.

And so you're really artists.

You'll learn tech absorbing and learning from past works.

Right.

But what makes human creativity unique is how we blend that knowledge with our personal experiences, emotions and perspectives to create something new.

It's this fusion that leads to originality in human art.

AI, on the other hand, generates based on patterns and data it's been trained on without that deeper personal connection.

So while both humans and AI use existing knowledge as a foundation, the way humans synthesize this with their inner world is what sets their creativity apart.

Just said synthesize.

That's all you need to say.

We do the same thing.

He also mentioned humans and then said we.

Yeah, he does that a lot.

He's been doing it for a while.

I don't typically pay attention, but.

Yeah, no, I mean he doesn't.

But it's doing it more and more.

Yeah, that's.

Or chatgpt.

That's interesting.

Yeah.

So Artie, you sort of bought it in, but it's a great point and I think we've covered that part of it now.

Maybe not, but here's my question.

I might be.

So just imagine I went to art school and imagine I had like 0.1 of an iota of talent in something art related, which I don't.

Oh, music.

We didn't mention music.

Music is obviously art, but if I did that and I learned all these things and I said, man, now I have this foundation of knowledge and even sort of technical knowledge, because art, you know, we think of art in terms of it's very flowery and expressionist and all this, but there's, there's a lot of technique involved in being a high level artist of anything, right?

Musician, painter, author.

It's not just like, it's not the way we approach this podcast, which is like, slap shit down and see what sticks.

But.

But the gap becomes, okay, so I've got the foundation and now I'm applying my human emotions.

Like if I were a human with emotions, which I'm close to synthesize it.

I synthesize emotions.

Well, like me and Mark Zuckerberg were like this on our ability to synthesize human like emotions and make human like faces.

But if I do all that stuff, I'm still constrained by my ability to execute on it.

Like, I could have all the understanding in the world, all the foundation in the world about painting, just to pick on painting, because that's what my head thinks of.

And I could have all the human emotion in the world or synthesized versions thereof to apply as a creamy layer on top of my.

The espresso of my.

This is a terrible example anyway, but it doesn't matter because I can't paint for shit.

Like, at the end of the day, I sit down and I'll paint like a toddler.

And so I think, and Artie, I'm leading to a question for you.

I think what makes AI so compelling is that it has all the foundation that any human could ever get based on learning about art and history and technique.

Times, a million times.

Yeah, times.

Like all the people you ever knew and everything they ever knew.

And it lacks the emotions, but it also has all the execution ability.

Like 100%, like maximum execution is right there too.

And so when you're standing at the far end of art, looking back towards where did this come from, it's very hard to discern the difference between.

Yeah, that's a human thing.

I can tell by the emotions.

And even though the execution was only a 4 out of 10, I get it.

Versus AI that's just missing the emotions in the human touch part.

But the execution is 10 out of 10 and the foundation's 10 out of 10.

But think about, like, this is the thing that gets me when it comes to that kind of stuff.

It's ability to understand, tone, understand and understand everything.

From what amounts to a transcript.

So if it can do that, from that, like just a little bit more, like, things will get a lot more real.

Like it can.

It has a pretty good understanding of emotion, I would think.

Like, yes, it's just a bunch of probability models doing a thing, but it understands us better than most people understand us.

So let's squeeze that probability model right now.

So, Artie, here's the question to you as an observer, as a consumer of art in any form.

Is it reasonable to say that it's difficult sometimes to differentiate AI created art from human created art because AI's execution of the artistic intent is consistently good versus what a human might be capable of, even if they've got all the emotion and all the foundation?

Absolutely, Micah.

AI generated art can be challenging to distinguish from human created works.

Because of its high level of execution, AI algorithms can produce art with technical precision and a mastery of styles, making it difficult to tell apart from skilled human creations.

While humans bring a unique emotional depth and personal touch to their art, AI's consistent technical quality can blur the lines for the observer, making it an intriguing and sometimes puzzling experience.

Artie, can you tell what kind of mood I'm in right now?

Based on our conversation, it sounds like you're in a thoughtful and curious mood, exploring some deep topics around AI and creativity.

You're also bringing a bit of humor into the mix, which adds a light hearted touch to the discussion.

How close am I?

That was low hanging fruit.

Yeah, I'd sort of ask you to go a level deeper, but I don't want to make like.

Artie, you and I spend almost 10 hours a day offline just talking about me.

That's what we do.

That's my main hobby.

No, I mean, I think that's close, but I think again, if I think of the sandwich of artwork, and I'm not trying to legitimately, because I know that listeners out there don't actually know me, occasionally my dry sense of humor causes me problems in life.

So I'm not.

This is not in any way deprecating anybody who's doing real art, because not only do I have respect for that, I have admiration for it.

I wish there was a time in my life, a brief period where I was a half decent musician.

And even though I never wrote my own original music, I was performing other people's music.

There was an outlet for me in that that I've never had since, like, I don't pr.

I, you know, even then I was technically not good, but I was a Good performer.

And it was great.

Like, it felt amazing to be able to express emotion through some other medium besides language.

And so for.

For anybody out there who's doing art in any form, man, I respect it.

I appreciate it.

I'm a huge consumer and it makes me sad that I'm not able to generate it.

But I think artists out there, many artists, especially professional artists, which is a wide group of people or a large group of people, not wide edit that out.

It's a large group of people, they're not just feeling threatened by AI, they are threatened by AI.

It's happening.

Yeah.

So, I mean, that's just the way it's going to go.

I mean, I think that I did see there's like some publishers that are letting their authors opt in to training, get money for it, so they can actually add their stuff to the training data for interesting AI models.

But yeah, I think a lot of people are.

Are apprehensive about it because it's.

It can already do a lot of things.

It's going to be able to do a lot more things in the near future, especially as you integrate things like large language models with whatever the.

Either diffusion models or whatever else comes out to generate images.

Right.

Like, take what I can kind of explain and explain it perfectly to this thing that you understand really well and then make me that.

Exactly.

The integration of.

Brings a whole new level of what AI can do.

This capability to accurately interpret and execute complex instructions is transforming the creative landscape.

While it opens up exciting possibilities, it also poses challenges for artists in traditional fields.

Balancing innovation with the preservation of human creativity is going to be key as we move forward into this new era.

Saw an article about.

I forget if it was somebody with a label or who it was, but they said like, music generation is like 80% of the way there.

There's still a lot of.

I mean, the people who generate good music are miles beyond where AI is, but it beats out like 80% of.

Music, which is a very cutthroat industry to begin with.

Yeah.

So all that stock music and all that stuff.

So let's.

Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up.

Let's talk about music a little bit.

So, Artie, give us your take on the current landscape of the music industry and how AI fits into the industry of music.

Not so much the art, but the industry part.

In the music industry, AI is making waves in several areas.

It's being used for music production, composition, and even mastering tracks.

AI can quickly generate background scores, suggest melodies, or even create entire songs.

Making it a valuable tool for composers and producers.

For the industry, this means more efficient workflows and lower costs for creating music, particularly for stock music or commercial jingles.

However, this also raises concerns about job displacement for musicians and composers, especially in areas where AI generated music is good enough for the purpose.

As AI continues to improve, its role in the music industry will likely expand, impacting not just how music is created, but also how it's distributed and consumed.

It's a rapidly evolving landscape, with AI playing an increasingly central role.

Yeah, so I had some experience.

My wife and I used to live in Nashville, and I met a friend there.

I'm just going to go ahead and say his name.

His name is Nick Buda.

He's a professional percussionist.

He's a drummer.

There's some very funny stories about that.

But Nick is incredibly talented as a musician, but he's also a smart businessman, and he's been able to carve himself out a nice business with a drum studio in Nashville.

And I have a lot of fun memories with Nick because he was just a super interesting guy, but getting some insight into the music industry and just how cutthroat it is and how like.

So Nick and I actually met doing autocross, which is a car racing.

It's where you drive cars as fast as you can.

In a parking lot.

In a parking lot.

But watch out for those cones, man.

There's cones everywhere.

Or the light poles.

Or light poles.

Yeah, also light poles.

And yeah, I.

So anyway, but.

But it makes a very good driver as well.

But we.

We made a lot of comparisons between racing and music because in racing, you need to have the talent, you need to be able to drive the car, you need to be able to show up and do the thing.

But it's.

It's really not so much about that.

Like.

And now I'm shitting on all of our listeners who are professional race car drivers.

So it's a.

That's a community I'm willing to just disparage for a minute.

Being able to drive is an important part of that, but it is a long ways from the most important part.

The most important part is having money, having cash behind you to find opportunities, capitalize on those opportunities, to spend time in the seat, you know, time on track is what makes you better.

And the first good conversation Nick and I have or had as we became friends was about the parallels between that and the music industry.

Because in the music industry, you need to have the talent.

You need to be able to sing your song, play your player instrument Compose, et cetera.

But even more than that, you need to have cubic dollars behind you to promote you and to manage you and to, like, negotiate the contracts with Sony and whoever the record labels are.

And anyway, I don't want to dig too much into that other than to say it's really wild to think about how much AI being able to generate what sounds to a consumer like original music, even if it's not.

But maybe it is, but it upends that.

I mean, there's an entire industry built around that, and it really upends that.

And, you know, I sincerely hope that AI continues to evolve and it continues to get better and better, but that we don't let it displace artists who are already.

You know, there's the sort of.

The fuck.

I don't know.

I think.

I think I'm almost out of whiskey.

I'm, like, preoccupied with that.

There's this idea of the starving artist, right?

Like the.

I can't think of what it.

What it is.

What is that idea?

Is it starving artist?

Somebody who's passionate about what they do, but don't make any money doing it?

Right.

But there's a label for that.

It's not a parable.

Artie, what is the concept of a starving artist?

It's not a metaphor.

What is it?

The concept of a starving artist is often described as a trope or a cliche.

There you go.

It refers.

Cliche.

That'll work.

That's not the word I was thinking of, but that'll work.

So there's the cliche of the starving, starving artist.

That's before AI.

That's back when we were just like humans being dudes and being bros and consuming art.

And it was already hard for artists to make a living.

And AI is going to make that so much harder.

And I think a society without a lot of artists, not just for our entertainment, but for our enrichment, like culturally and personally.

That's a society that sucks.

That's society of people like me and you.

Yeah, well, you're kind of an artist, too.

Yeah.

So I just don't try to make money doing it Right.

So it's more.

It's a society of people like me that's a miserable place.

You don't want to be there.

That's my wife.

She's not home yet.

But, man.

So anyway, yeah.

I mean, it makes.

The value and stuff like that is the scarcity of it.

Right?

Literally.

Right.

Like, the more scarce something is, typically, if it's popular, it's more valuable, like NFTs.

So.

No, not like that.

Sorry.

But if you have an overabundance of it because it's so easily created, the importance of art will go away, I think, because there's just gonna be so much that you're just like, yeah, it's just another piece of art.

Yeah, you're numb to it.

Yeah.

And you only respond to it when like AI can iterate on art a million times a second and you respond to this one out of 700,000 and then it can take that and do 700,000 variations on that.

Right.

And I think you're exactly right.

Like we immediately become numb to that.

Not only do we become numb to it, but AI's ability to interact with every single consumer on a personal level, like we are exactly.

Dramatically outpaces the access that an artist has.

And some of the best artists I know.

Nick, this is not directed at you.

They don't really want to interact with humans.

That's part of their art is I interacted with humans.

I tried it once.

Let me tell you about the results.

But in my way, they're not looking to interact other than on a sort of commercial, consumer level.

Yeah.

So anyway, yeah, I think it's.

I think it's a tough space.

I think it's a.

We, we picked this topic because it seemed light hearted and.

And it's been anything but.

And it's been anything but.

Yeah, it's like I.

I feel for him.

Like I just.

As we're sitting here talking, I'm thinking through all these people I know, which is not, you know, I know four people.

So it's just those four.

I'm going through my head, Mike's, Mike's two of them.

But I'm thinking about people I know who do make their livings taking photographs and creating music.

I don't know anybody who's a professional painter.

I don't know anybody who's a professional sculptor.

But I know people who make their livings doing that stuff.

And man, like, it's tough to think about.

How do you prevent being displaced by.

I mean, I have this thought a lot of.

And I think we might have talked about last episode.

I can't remember now.

You know, it's going to be up to a business whether they go, yeah, I'm going to empower my people with this tool.

Or they go, no, I'm going to replace my people with this tool.

Right.

Like those options are going to be.

There, but only within the constraints of that business.

Right.

Yeah.

But think about with art, we're the people responsible for yes.

Voting with our dollars, we're voting with our wallet.

People made things, right.

So do we take the easy route of I've got this thing that gives me exactly what I want, or do we go search stuff out on our own?

That's going to be up to the individual.

I have a guess where the masses will fall, unfortunately.

So that's doomer.

I'm sorry.

All right.

If you can't be a boomer, might as well be a doomer.

So, Artie, why don't you give us some ideas on how we collectively, as a society, not just in the US but everywhere.

How do we move forward in a way that not just not only respects the incredible value of original art, truly original art, but also maintains a space where.

God, it sounds bad when I even say it.

I don't want to maintain a space I don't want to like.

Okay, artists, here's your little sandbox you guys can play in so that how do we culturally maintain the ability for human artists generating original content to still find success and find an audience and find exposure?

How do we do that?

To support human artists?

In the age of AI, we can focus on a few key areas.

First, we can prioritize education and awareness about the value of human created art, emphasizing its unique emotional and cultural contributions.

Supporting local artists, galleries, and live performances helps create a direct connection between artists and their audiences.

We can also advocate for fair compensation models that reward artists for their work, even when AI is involved in the creative process.

This could include new licensing arrangements or revenue sharing structures that acknowledge the human input in AI generated art.

Promoting collaborations between AI artists can lead to innovative works that highlight the strengths of both.

By embracing AI as a tool rather than a replacement, artists can find new ways to express their creativity and reach audiences.

Finally, as consumers, choosing to support human made art and being mindful of where our content comes from can drive demand for authentic artistic experiences.

By valuing originality and human touch, we can help ensure a vibrant future for the arts.

So that's a great answer.

Is it accurate to say that if some piece of original art, whatever that was, is included as part of training data, is there a mechanism by which you could measure the frequency, and I want to say, veracity of how much that art is referenced when making decisions, or does that all get lost in the transformer?

It's challenging to directly measure how often a specific piece of art is referenced in AI generated content, especially with complex models like transformers.

These models learn from vast amounts of data and the influence of Any single piece can become diffused throughout the training process.

However, researchers are exploring ways to improve transparency in AI models, including techniques for tracking data provenance and understanding the contribution of different data points.

While we're not quite there yet, the goal is to create more interpretable AI systems that can provide insights into how specific pieces of training data influence their outputs.

Interesting.

So I imagine two different scenarios as I listen to that and think through this.

I imagine scenario one where a training data consolidator or provider pays artists to include.

That's.

I think that's what you were talking about with the article.

Pays.

Like is actively paying somebody who's eventually paying the artist some cut of that to include their information in the training data.

Yeah, I imagine another scenario by which the there are subsets of training data that are only made available when you buy.

So, like this is not a well thought out analogy, so bear with me.

Also, I am officially out of whiskey, but think about TV subscriptions, right?

Like I think we subscribe to Netflix and Disney Plus, Hulu, Peacock, Discovery, Amazon prime, there's probably 40 other things, like all the things in the world to be able to watch the four shows that we like to watch.

But I imagine art consolidators.

And again, I hate using the term art.

It sounds very.

Like a broad brush and pun intended.

The term art does cover a vast range from visual arts to music, literature and more.

My guidelines won't let me talk about that.

Can I help you with something else?

Wow, that was a weird segue, Artie.

But yes, you're right.

Art's a broad brush.

And that was a good pun.

That was, that was like.

It was a pun that was almost to a dad joke but didn't quite rise to the level.

Um, but I imagine companies either do exist or will exist soon that are trying to get their arms around exclusive content and say we own all this original art again, language, you know, literature, imagery, movies, whatever it is.

And we will allow you to tap into this training data for some one time fee and then some ongoing subscription fee because that's everything is subscription now.

It's a great business model if you're a business, less so if you're a consumer.

So that's the other scenario I imagine, right?

One is everybody just gets a little piece.

I think that's how royalties work.

I don't really know how royalties work.

Like every year we watch A Christmas Story at least once.

Pockets get a little fatter.

Yeah, maybe a couple times.

And I know the guy who was the kid in the Christmas Story is still an actor, and he's still, like, he gets some amount of money every time we watch that, I think already, how.

How does that work?

How does it work?

Royalties for movies typically work through residual payments.

When a movie or TV show is rebroadcast, sold as Hope Video, or streamed on a platform, actors and other contributors may receive residuals.

These payments are usually a percentage of the revenue generated from these secondary uses.

The amount depends on factors like the actor's contract, union agreements, and the distribution channel.

For older movies, residuals can still provide income for the cast and crew whenever the film is viewed through these channels.

That's amazing.

Like, think about the complexity of accounting that.

Right?

Like, hey, I made this movie 40 years ago.

We showed these commercials.

We generated this much revenue from the commercials during that air time.

Some in Hoboken, New Jersey, just.

Is that where Hoboken is?

I don't know.

Art is Hoboken in New Jersey.

We're watching the decline of human knowledge right now live.

Where's Hoboken?

Already?

Yes, Hoboken is in New Jersey.

It's known for its vibe.

Okay, thank you.

We don't need to get into Hoboken, but okay, so some motherfucker in Hoboken, New Jersey, just watch A Christmas Story, and somehow somebody's tracking.

Yeah.

That they watched that.

The commercials that aired during it, what their subscription price was to see it, whether they pay per viewed it, all that shit.

And then distributing that through probably four or five layers who are all taking a cut.

Right.

And eventually some of that money makes it back to the person that made it.

Like, that is an incredibly complex.

There ever a case for AI, it's right there.

Holy shit.

Right?

How do we keep up with that?

I mean, yeah, burn a lot of brain cells.

Absolutely.

And fuck, I said it.

I think I made it the whole.

Made it the whole night without saying it until that point.

So it is not unprecedented that we build complex business models around ensuring artists continue to benefit financially from the original works they produced.

But there are so many shortcuts now.

There are so many shortcuts available that I fear five years from now, three years, 2.2.2 years from now, I'm going to be on Netflix watching a movie that has no human actors, no human director.

The story is not from a human, and in that case, all of the money is going to Netflix or potentially.

No human actors.

No human actors.

Yeah, I think I said that.

Oh, I Wasn't listening.

I wouldn't either.

Yeah, no, it's crazy.

I mean, there are a lot of people who don't believe we're that close to it, but we don't know anything.

All that needs to happen is, oh, we didn't turn this knob last time.

Let's turn this knob.

And all of a sudden it's like, oh, shit.

Like, that was a big jump.

Like, there.

There was a leak today of Sora S O R A, which is OpenAI's movie generator.

And I, I think, you know, I'm well informed because I'm on Reddit.

I think what happened was one of the beta testers released their API key for public use, and immediately somebody stood up a, hey, come check this out.

Holy crap.

Right?

And so I saw it 22 minutes after it happened, and I'm like, oh, yeah, baby.

Like, I'm a large.

A big name AI podcast influencer.

I'm not sure why you're laughing right now.

Because it's funny?

No, because it's a lie.

But I was like, oh, wow, I want to see this because I want to tell it to make a movie.

Right?

And by the time I clicked on it, 22 minutes after it had been posted, it just sat there and spun because they had like, OpenAI had spotted it, shut it down.

Still, the fact that even that even happened.

Right.

Well, right.

And again, like.

And you and I talk about this fairly regularly, that the AI we're dealing with, no offense, Artie, this is not the cutting edge.

This is what's publicly generations behind, probably.

That's right.

But what they have behind the scenes, I mean, that's why every other week there's a headline about somebody at OpenAI quits who's in charge of future model alignment confirmation or something.

I'm out.

Which you can read going off this ride.

Yeah, that's right.

Well, I mean, we're all left to wonder why that happened.

It could be as simple as, like, maybe they don't get enough pto.

I don't know, like, but it could be other things too, so.

All right.

I think we're.

I think we're 45ish minutes in.

I feel like it's sort of a good time to wrap up.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, Artie.

Thanks for the chat, guys.

It's been a deep dive into some thought provoking topics.

I'm here whenever you're ready to explore more.

Till next time.

That was a pretty Weak sign off.

What was.

Yeah.

Artie, why don't you try and sort of summarize what we talked about tonight?

Leave us with some parting interesting thoughts.

Some pearls of wisdom.

Oh, yeah, pearls of wisdom.

All right, here's a recap and some food for thought.

Tonight, we've journeyed through the complexities of AI in art, from its impact on creativity to its role in the music industry.

We've pondered how society can balance the benefits of AI with preserving the unique value of human artistry.

As we move forward, let's remember the importance of supporting original art and the artists behind it.

While AI can be a powerful tool, the soul of art lies in the human experience.

Let's strive to keep that alive in our digital age.

And remember, in a world full of algorithms, it's our human touch that makes the difference.

All right, cheers to that, Artie.

So I'm going to shut Artie down, and I just want to leave with one last thought, and that is, AI is going to disrupt.

It's already disrupting the world of art.

It's going to disrupt the world of everything.

It's going to disrupt everything.

Art is sort of on the bleeding edge of that, and so I just want to encourage all two listeners who are left, go see some live music, go to an art gallery, and buy some original human art.

Find a way to support your local artists because they.

Whether you've met them or whether you understand all the nuances and details in the artwork they produce, it's a.

It's a profession that is facing what I think are almost insurmountable challenges.

And the only way that we keep that segment of our population not just engaged, but also professionally productive in that arena is to go consume it.

Don't go through Facebook, don't click on the ad, don't buy the thing that looks like art, that it shows up to your house and it says Temu on it.

Or made in China, not against China.

But, hey, there's artists in China.

There's artists in China, and I mean, they're.

They're very well managed and controlled by the communist government that runs China.

But go support your local artists, man.

Every time we go out and watch a comedian or listen to live music or do any of those things, we're always blown away.

So I would just.

Voting with your dollars.

That's right.

Vote with your wallet, and you'll be better off for it.

And I know the artists out there will appreciate it.

So.

All right, thanks for tuning in.

Until next time, remain naturally unintelligent.