Lots of artists! They are not even remotely hard to find. They are literally a google search away. Typing stuff into Suno because you can't be bothered to search "new artists that sound 90s" is crazy
In general, "loss of contact with reality" is well understood to be an individual experience. If you think voices are talking to you, that's schizophrenia. If you think God wrote an entire book of life advice, that's Christianity. So, kinda by definition, a large group of people cannot generally experience "loss of contact with reality", they're merely mistaken.
The alternative is to accept that 90% of humans are suffering some form or another of psychosis, because there's very little that even a majority (51%) of people agree on, and that means about half the population is wrong about any given topic. Multiply by the number of topics out there...
You've assumed an uncharitable boundary and then said "see, that's obviously wrong". Well of course it is if the boundary you selected places 90% of humanity on the side of "loss of contact with reality".
So just, you know, don't do that. Select a boundary that places 90% of humanity on the side of "wrong about a number of things but within the bounds of normalcy for the species at large", sprinkle in some caveats about "in the industrialized world" and "for someone with at least a highschool education" and such, and you've got what I was actually describing.
My point is that AI psychosis is well within the bounds you're mentioning: yeah, those people are wrong about a number of things, but it's well within the bounds of normalcy for the species at large; especially in the industrialized world; especially for anyone that has at least a high school education.
You can't cherry-pick a definition where "AI psychosis" is meaningfully different from "wrong about a few things" without hitting a huge swath of "within the bounds of normalcy for the species at large" - there's just too many people in the category
There is a huge difference between being incorrigibly wrong (delusion) and psychosis (much more encompassing). There is not a difference by degrees because being incorrigibly out of touch on a range of issues does not mean you are psychotic.
It's renting vs. owning. I care a lot about music, so I don't like paying monthly for it without even getting to build a real collection.
Also, it's just nice to not be at the whims of corporations and copyright lawyers. It sucks when some song you love gets taken down, or your streaming app introduces some shitty UI changes, or you find out the company you're paying has been doing unethical shit, or the monthly fee goes up, or any number of other annoyances.
It's the opposite - we're way less centralized now. No one cares about what's on the radio or MTV anymore. We have infinite access to every song ever* for $11 a month, and the recommendation algorithms will happily show you music outside the mainstream and outside the current decade if that's what keeps you listening.
> No one cares about what's on the radio or MTV anymore.
Why not?
> if that's what keeps you listening.
That's the key, though. Kids are generally biased toward new music. This phenomenon is perfectly natural and consistent over the generations, as shown in the article. In the 1980s, it wasn't particularly hard to "discover" 70s or 60s music, and indeed parents might want their kids to listen to their music, but that's not necessarily what the kids want to listen to, because it's not cool. Parents are uncool. Kids want their own music.
What's interesting, though, is that GenZ and Millennials appear to be less biased toward the new music and less biased against the old. The fact that every song ever is available for streaming doesn't mean that people want to listen to every song ever. My understanding is the streaming plays are very top-heavy toward the top artists, and smaller artists are struggling mightily under the streaming payout system.
How? It's fine to have on people with all different viewpoints, including awful ones, but I think pushing back when they're on some bullshit is good and necessary. Otherwise you're just uncritically spreading fake junk to a huge audience, which leads to more people believing in fake junk.
reply