site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   3309 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for September 26, 2025

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

but I wouldn't want to listen to any of this again despite liking some of the genres it's aping.

The question of the hour: Is that really different than most songs produced by human artists?

I admit that I keep falling back to the same ~1000 songs that I enjoy listening to, very few of which are less than 5 years old, many of which are older than I am. And most 'new' songs I'll play like a dozen times and then they sit in an unused playlist for months or years.

I don't think I've heard a SINGLE pop song in the last year that I consider 'memorable' (not entirely true: Chappel Roan's "HOT TO GO!" sometimes pops into my brain unbidden).

I truly do enjoy Kendrick Lamar's music, but after listening to GNX on repeat for a couple weeks I've not felt any desire to add it to my main playlist. Humble is on there though.

And I lamented before that there's really no such thing as a new 'genre' anymore. So the AI does have the advantage of letting me play around with combining genres to see if anything neat falls out or is worth pursuing.

I am going to agree there's no actual replacement for having a talented live performer in front of you.

I don't think I've heard a SINGLE pop song in the last year that I consider 'memorable' (not entirely true: Chappel Roan's "HOT TO GO!" sometimes pops into my brain unbidden).

Similar vibe (sassy red-haired female with socio-culturally relevant songs), you should look up CMAT.

The question of the hour: Is that really different than most songs produced by human artists?

Does it even matter? The world is already full of slop and having one more way to produce slop isn't helpful for anyone except some SEO spammers.

The question of the hour: Is that really different than most songs produced by human artists?

Possible, hence why I called it replacement level slop.

I do find Spotify's algorithm shows me recent songs that I like with some regularity (and no, these aren't from the Spotify ghost artists/ais), so I'm not as negative as you about today's music.

Music is perhaps not the point of pop music, it's the admiration and parasocial relationship with the artist. It's not clear to me if people will be willing to do this with an AI, but perhaps.

Music is perhaps not the point of pop music

Certainly not today, but it used to be, at least for the better tier pop. Just take the Beatles. Are they pop? Inarguably. Were they musically good? Without even the tiniest shadow of a doubt.

There are gobs of excellent pop music all the way up to the 90s. Then it went to shit for reasons I haven't been able to fully articulate yet but involves the concentration of labels, rise of solo artist & built groups and of course modern production methods (and a bunch of other things).

Edit: The music being a major point of pop music goes back centuries: For example Mozart and Beethoven were "pop" artist in their time.

Then it went to shit for reasons I haven't been able to fully articulate yet but involves the concentration of labels, rise of solo artist & built groups and of course modern production methods (and a bunch of other things).

To add: it went to shit also because pop music industry’s big data data-sciencing and machine-learning was able to identify what the masses wanted, and gave it to them. Manufacturing of, e.g. Sabrina Carpenter and Sabrina Carpenter types and the disappearance of auteurs and any sense of authorship to the margins.

The music being a major point of pop music goes back centuries: For example Mozart and Beethoven were "pop" artist in their time.

The top answer suggests that a much larger fraction of the population has heard e.g. Michael Jackson than Beethoven or Mozart in their time. Beethoven and Mozart were "pop" for the upper crust of society. Has music popular with the 1% gotten worse? I don't know, but certainly mass media has transformed who you have to appeal to in order to have mass success.

Beethoven and Mozart were "pop" for the upper crust of society.

Sure, but that was an economic divide, not a divide based on artistic qualities. It doesn't change the fact that 1) they were widely popular and 2) they have inarguable artistic merit. If anything, they were more pop music than what general folk listened to as folk music was anonymous and lacked any of modern pop music's parasocial relationship that Mozart and Beethoven had among parts of their audience.

Sure, but that was an economic divide, not a divide based on artistic qualities

It is based on artistic qualities because Beethoven got big appealing to the 1%. Taylor Swift got big appealing to the 99%. They are not the same and comparing them is a mistake.

it's the admiration and parasocial relationship with the artist.

I do think there's an issue where with AI you can't really make the AI itself the 'object' of your obsessions because there's nothing 'there.' And making the person prompting the AI the object seems extremely odd.

But I feel pretty similar about people who seem obsessed with certain DJs, when there is certainly an argument that all they're doing is pressing "Play" on the computer and then fiddling with some knobs. They still have 'fans.'

But, uh, we see that (some) people are readily accepting AI boyfriends and girlfriends.

And Hatsune Miku has a large following, even does concerts. Granted, the Japanese can anthropomorphize ANYTHING.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats