pouët.net

And consciously so! :)

People will prefer watching human feats over machine feats, though (C) grip.

Interesting. IRL (TM), i've so far only comed across technical solutions to solve social problems.

Just when I thought the thread was running out of steam...

you forgot door number 4... 3D + rendering it ;)

(movie people love door number 4)

s7ing never has to do that.

MUSIC Compo oder nur ein Aufruf an die Gruppe mal den Hintern zu heben? :-P

I'm glad I haven't heard a linked AI-generated song yet. Just like I haven't heard Taylor Swift.

HI asks provocatively: Do the laws of nature provide protection against copyright infringement?

AI AI AI... feels like 2010: Facebook Facebook Facebook...

This thread is different, but hey - the topic seems to be the same: advertising and getting used to it.

"Linked"? But, you may already have, by accident. Did you watch Revision Fast Music compo, by any chance? :)

AI is not the new monster that threats everything and everyone, but for sure we need to adapt to the technology and consider rulechanges in music compos.

With tools like https://www.udio.com/ everyone can easily "create" bombtracks just using prompt and even adding a few lyrics.

So we should think at least about providing the DAW Project file(s) in streaming music competitions instead of only the .mp3/.wav/.ogg

I stumbled upon Udio because this here popped up in my socialmedia timeline:
this could be original Depeche Mode if i didnt knew it was AI

Udio makes some above average goa trance. I wish I knew how to create goa on this level :) now that tune I heard is lost in time as the UI changed. It was by a prompter called 604 something… like tears in the rain…

AI is just a new tool and there is nothing to go against this "revolution".
I can understand people beeing angry with materials produced by AI. Art, texts, and even now musics can be really great.
I see them as new tools, that bring new possibilities.
Back in time, new langages or new engines brought the same anger. "You did not coded all your engine so your are cheating". Was also the same with artist scanning existing arts or copying them.
No real solution for that. Hope people will use them in an intelligent way (no for cheating in compo).
And hope this will bring more production on our loved machines.

Sadly AI is not doing correct 68K code for now, still need to spend lot of time on it LOL.

I think the current fad of LLMs will never quite cut it for code (or is there something else?).

The most trivial boilerplate shite in Python or whatever for which there are a zillion examples to "remix", but for more exotic things... :)

AI can be used for good or evil. There will be a fear for coders/artists/musicians to approach known AI users for working on their prods, and AI users will similarly feel a fear to approach someone who wants their talents, knowing you are handing in a quick AI one instead.

In this way AI, is no different from other forms of stealing credit, like a musician or artist that does a quick once-over on the work of others. The stealers may have to co-op with people that haven't found out, or earn some trust back.

Orgas preselect any entry they fancy, their reasons are their own and the prod is free to release on another party. At least this is how it has worked before. We should make sure authors own the IP of what's presented to avoid the usual bots employed by Google to be middleman to lawyers protecting the IPs of artists. We should also be creative!

If a gfx compo entry looks too much like a photo, or they recognize a song, they can ask. Coding is different. Whereas there have been many variations on female protagonists and familiar genres, no-one seems to blink twice if a very similar effect is presented again. Code is also harder to rip or copy and adapt (and make not crash - even if the source code would be shared!)

When it comes to AI, then if something is suspected, they could require workstages. This is also how the entry page is phrased on most demoparty websites. Again if suspect, another way is for orgas to simply ask for specific credits, rather than generic ones. If they look at a part and think something is taken credit for with a generic 'gfx' or 'tune' credit, they could ask, "who drew this picture", and "who composed this song"?

And so could viewers, fans, and friends. Specific credits is a good way to appreciate the work done, and if some would take undue credit, it will be found out eventually. I think many will be found guilty, some to a small extent and perhaps not now, when it's faster and easier than ever to be creative.

I.e. if credits are generic and you suspect something, why not ask a simple question? Hopefully the answer is straight and from there, the credit is taken for the job.

You can also try to define creativity.
And in a world of orthodoxy, delineations and classifications, copyright ownership and clear-cut originality, define where there is creativity when you reinterpret another effect, make a musical piece from radio samples, paint over a photo, or fill your work with AI fragments.
Demoscene has an extreme imbalance towards craftmanship, and technical things.
What could keep demoscene alive is to infuse more artistry into it.
We should do away with orthodoxy. The demo form needs to expand.
What's needed here is more freedoms, not less.
By setting up rules you do the opposite and finish it off.
If you don't see that this is precisely what kills the art, then I can't help you.
But ok, we are very old - and already in the preservation phase - see UNESCO.
This means nothing new is expected from it.

I just want to make sure I understood this right. This is what you’re saying: What some perhaps might label “exellence” is in fact “craftmanship”. And soft spot demoscene has for this “craftmanship” is in fact killing it (the demoscene that is).

While I wholeheartedly agree the demoscene values craftmanship (artisanry) highly and quite wrongly oftentimes insists on calling it “art”, as if that bestows it with some additional intrinsic value, I don’t suppose this is lethal to the demoscene.

Furtherly, you suggest that what could keep the demoscene alive is some “artistry”. But what is it? Can you please tell us more about this “artistry”? Does it involve AI prompt-to-image tools? Is perhaps “TM2” an example of this “artistry”?


Doesn’t the whole concept of demos evolve around self-imposed restrictions? Like “has to be realtime”, or “has to be below xxx bytes”, or “has to run on a specific vintage hardware”, etc. Isn’t the “absolute freedom” concept the exact opposite to demoscene? What you are saying is that the demoscene in order to survive has to cease to be the demoscene. Become something else. Is this really so?

4gentE, you cannot create art on purpose. But the creator is the one who (willingly or subconsciously) initiates the process... by attempt of opening a channel, by making an offer to communicate - a sacrifice even, a disclosure of individual ways of perception and thought patterns that the creator is willing to share.
And then there's a recipient, and there has to be a match between the two to establish this channel, through which something is being conveyed. And the recipient also needs to be inclined, and be open towards such an offering.

Art is not done by decree. Knowledge and craftmanship can be a basis to initiate the process. But craftmanship alone is not sufficient, and the replication of a "style" is not an offering - at best it's a sentimental desire to revive an emotion, or at worst a rip-off of an idea that has already proven to click with some recipients.

Craftmanship is just that: The result from a lot of work, passion, practise, experience, ... what's killing the demoscene is not the excellence, but an overemphasis on craftmanship, our struggle to build something bigger on top of that. To come up with something new, to make an offering - including to make a fool of yourself. And this difficulty isn't even anybody's "fault". I think the reason is just the limitation in form that is inherent to demos.



No, what I'm saying is that we should be aware of this limitation in form, and not confuse craftmanship with art. When you have mastered the skills, then you are just ready to enter the next level. It's difficult enough as it is, so restricting the form through more rules is running into the wrong direction.


As I said already, it would be crazy presumptious to say so. At least it's an attempt to do something differently. If it's art remains at the discretion of the spectator. Also we have already defended ourselves and explained way too much of the process. I'd be happy if it has worked, for some, briefly, in the audience in the party hall.

@bifat:
I agree with much you wrote above.
The point where we diverge is this whole LLM AI image makers.
See, they are exactly the “non-art” you mentioned. Only in this case, even the “craftmanship” is missing, or rather it’s there but it’s stolen, taken without consent from other people’s art and craft and exploited.

Also where you describe art as communication. Exactly! I also think that art is communication. Communication pre-supposes understanding. LLM AI cannot understand and therefore, what it churns out cannot be really called communication by any stretch of imagination.

direct "linked" to an AI-web-site
Yes, I didn't hear the competition by accident and (hopefully) classified it correctly. More 1987's acid parts would have been nice.
For me, "moving on" was always about discovering something myself and knowing I taught it to myself (with the help of AI tomorrow if you like) until it became a part of me. Not at an elite level, but I had my moments and I don't regret anything, not even that I was passive and uninterested in other people's productions from a spectator's point of view because I was constantly active. I had my fun.
I prefer to be quiet, but age makes me fuzzy but kind. You can never please everyone here anyway and you're immediately picked apart, which is just as depressing as AI cheese coarsely diced by amoebas. :) Did I really write that?... lol The thing for me is: If it comes from the demo scene, I can't hate it. But is everyone coming into the demo scene with AI now?.... omg. Good in theory, but practically a no-go, because that is suicide and a great disrespect for the "elderly". Ok, they are using AI now too. hm

@bifat:
Re-reading your posts I get the feeling I’m misunderstanding something. Your argumentation most of the time seems right to me, but the conclusions seem mostly wrong. So I’m supposing there’s gotta be some noise in the communication. For example, you are suggesting that in the case of the demoscene craftmanship is hindering art. I don’t think that this could be stated like this. Sure, I get how craftmanship could be in the way of art in some cases. But this is far from being the rule. Craftmanship is in most cases the needed fuel for art, not a hindrance. You said it yourself:


Exactly. Art usually emerges from practicing the craftmanship. It’s a journey. Of course, every now and then some extremely talented outsider that couldn’t be arsed to do the craftmanship comes along and makes such good artifacts that it would be a real shame if this person was kept out. But this is not a rule, it’s an exception.
I’m not saying that art cannot be created with the likes of Magix Music Maker, I’m just saying that it just so happens that most art is not created with it, and that it just so happens that what came out of it was mostly crap. In my view these LLM art toys are MMM and worse. In my opinion (and this as it turns out is subjective, so please excuse me for using it again) TM2 is an example of this and a victim. You cannot throw away craftmanship and expect that will turn what you’re making into art. I could be wrong on this, but it seems to me that you mentioned how demoscene has trouble recognizing art. See, (again in my opinion, and I’m not expressing it to hurt anybody) most of the thumbups this prod got is a great demonstration of this inability to recognize art.

@4gentE: Maybe some of bifat's statements make more sense when you avoid sorting everything into either of two opposite extremes.

@4gentE: TM2 was done by demoscene veterans. There was probably no lack of craftmanship, the machine is pretty much maxed out, and we used tools that we wrote ourselves.

Remains this controversy about supposedly unethical use of assets and "shitting into the face" of artists, illustrators and copyright holders. Some even thought we did this on purpose and it was a planned provocation. Hell no, that's doing us too great an honour, but thanks. :-)

The cheating is already there, has always been: Lots of Amiga and C64 prods are 90% crafted on PCs nowadays with cross assemblers, compilers and crunchers. On PC they are using readily available 3d engines. People seem to content themselves with anims instead of real effects, others have pixeled over Vallejo scans and ripped samples from records and radio programs.

And here I see some funny bias: Once a red alarm ("AI" in this case) is sounded, this seems to blind spectators for everything else. Or have they been blind from the beginning? ... and just expect a demo compo to rub them their sweet spots... (aaah, thanks, a little bit more to the top, that's how I like my inconvex and twister :-)

What about all the other artistic qualities that are possibly present besides AI cheating? But fine: Everybody is entitled to their thumbs and their reason to love and loathe and be indifferent - and as Photon has correctly hinted at, thumbs are often not geared towards the work, but to buddies.

And this makes me wonder... how well developed is our scene to stand changes in the future? Is there a future? When all the buddies who can thumb your work are in retirement... who will recognise the stuff, and what will be left for us to appreciate?

And who will try something new (the original demoscene spirit, mind you) if they risk being summoned before the court of AI suspicion? Great idea, Photon! We will have lots of glenz and twisters for years to come :-)

@bifat:
I understand you think TM2 is great, but you seem to forget that I think that it’s very (and I do mean very) bad, and not due to AI use. So, please forgive me for repeating it. I don’t like this repetition, but “this is great, but controversial because of AI” is definitely NOT a consensus here. This needs to be noted (again) I think. In fact I was one of the people who thought this was a provocation (because I see it as being so bad) and I was the one who stated that all this communication and discussion is what elevates TM2 to art status. I stated once before that the only thing that deserves an applause is compression/display tech. Severely lacking needed knowledge to comprehend this myself I fully trust you guys that the tech is exceptional. So, basically if pressed to applaud anything/anybody about this prod it’s you, Krill, and CJam. Great craftmanship! Everything (and I do mean literally everyrhing) else? You get the picture. Great construction job! Lack of any coherent architecture. And of finesse. So (being scene veterans) I’m by no means telling you that the tech craftmanship is lacking. You built a great race car, but you built it for the wrong driver.


I’m asking myself this question about the people that celebrate TM2 (not the display tech). I cannot help but wonder, are these people blind? Were they blind from the beginning but I failed to notice? Did they express their admiration for great demos, great gfx, great comics, great movies in the past by mere chance? As in they’d express the same admiration for total crap? Is that possible? Did it take AI for me to realize this? I guess I’m pretty dense. I know of poor taste in the past (read Vallejo) but I was under the impression that the scene advanced a few notches since then.

Picture this. What if all of this is indeed Greippi’s performance/provocation? Demonstration of lack of clear criteria in the scene? Demonstration of how the scene cannot distinguish between turd and cake? What if you guys were just instruments for that artistic purpose? Did this ever occure to you?

No. Take your weird conspiracy theories somewhere else. Thank you. =)