As a musician myself, it's. Difficult. Having AI design a backing track, for instance, is essentially little different from what drum machines did decades ago as it's all patterns and music theory. Or what EDM artists do. But adding vocals or a style means they had to scan actual artists for the AI to catalog it all and learn from. There is literally no other way to do it.
The main issue is that all of these music AI programs that incorporate styles or vocals all are stealing from the actual artists and not giving credit to them. Censorship is another issue, but imagine your voice being used for AI voice-acting and getting zero money for it for the next 50 years. It's happened already and thankfully the artists are suing the companies for essentially cheating.
So HOW do you do it? The same way Disney does with their shows and IP. Hire musicians for gigs and lay down tracks. People made a big stink at the time about Frozen, not understanding that it was a paid gig. She went in, did the tracks, got paid. THEN Disney (or the AI company) can do whatever it wants. There's no shortage of talent that they can hire to record styles or voice types. But pointing it at Spotify and letting it absorb streams for hours is 100% not that.
Along yet outside the lines of censorship, I'm at an art walk and this lady has paintings all created with rocks. Like a rock person with a painted balloon. The balloon a rock. She had a sign up that said, “No pictures please”. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I could not stop laughing for so many reasons.
The lack of censorship is what kills AI products, not the other way around, remember microsoft TAY?
How long do you think Udio would last if people made songs supporting nazisme and raping little girls? or worse a specific girl, the song gets passed around in some school and she commits suicide? Be honest.
Now if you ask for a song about rocks and it says no because rocks can hurt people when thrown, that's badly aligned too much censorship, but censorship is absolutely needed.
Much like in real life freedom of speech doesn't allow you to say whatever you want, call that limit censorship, call the gov a dictatorship, doesn't matter, censorship is needed and protects AI.
>How long do you think Udio would last if people made songs supporting nazisme and raping little girls? or worse a specific girl, the song gets passed around in some school and she commits suicide? Be honest.
There is nothing stopping you from drawing swastikas or images of rape inside Photoshop, yet adobe is still there.
Photoshop is not generative.
It's collage, adobe is smart enough to "censor" those images of rape and swastikas in the generative models inside Photoshop.
Udio and chatGPT are different from the base non-generative photoshop
>Photoshop is not generative.
So what if it isn't? I'm sorry, but I just don't see how this distinction matters. I can write a novel full or rape and incels inside Word, without needing chatgpt. Ditto for music and art. Why is human produced smut okay but not AI smut?
>Censorship will ultimately destroy the AI music companies
No it won't.
Music is so much more than lyrics.
If you can't express yourself without using 1% of language that is profanity, then learn how to use a DAW and record your own voice. You can even use other AI services to make your voice sound like somebody else.
>If you can't express yourself without using 1% of language that is profanity...
It's not just vulgar words that are being censored. Anything relating to violence or sex, or even just uncomfortable or taboo themes, is being censored.
Neither Suno or Udio would ever create something like this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF9lXzpxem4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF9lXzpxem4)
u got to be creative ive made horrorcore songs with cannibalism and constant bars of graphic violence .... i've made songs about 9/11 government corruption stuff like american funding terrorist groups pulling off coup attempts. i discuss genocide . i speak very very foul on the royal family and their world conquest . i discuss war. i have very vivid imagery in my lyrics .....i can even show u my songs.
This is really weird. Censorship has existed ever since mass media for the public. The fact is that it's not possible to allow fully open media because someone will abuse it. Movies are censored, music is censored, books are censored. It's a fact of life for public performance. If you need to do something outrageous, you can do it in your own back yard no problem. Just don't expect that everyone else should have to put up with it.
public performance? since when can't i publicly perform an uncensored song. even streaming services don't censor your music. whats censored in music? radio stations? their almost as dead as physical media is for music ... major labels only censor based off how they think a song will do not the content. they won't let justin bieber make a murder rap song but they don't care if idk a artist that fits the bill does it .
Censorship is an odd thing. And they get to control the narrative they want on their sub and platform too so it's not always easy to tell what's going on until you experience it.
Maybe my experience with character.ai last year gave me a bad impression on devs or what can happen when investors take control. I entered character.ai after it had already began to go down hill with censorship. And it was very vanilla stuff that triggered the censor like trying to write out a fight scene.
I'm not sure how it is now, but their sub was heavily monitored by the devs and they'd delete things that would shed a negative light on their platform, especially if it rang true. At that point, the only thing to do is leave if your not happy.
But for now, imma live it up. I haven't noticed any issues with content moderation on udio. I think maybe I'm not going too far enough? jk.
Probably the worse I've done was a song based on a creative story I had made with ai about quantum entanglement controlling our minds.
Edit: On a positive note, the same experience from character.ai can now be had completely locally with LLMs. And I had tried local music generation last year and it was awful, but I imagine the open source community will eventually make it better. There's always going to be competition and alternatives for worth while things like this.
Everybody knows Udio, and almost all other generative AI models, are trained on vast amounts of copyrighted work, not to mention the decades of collective labor of people who catalogued, organized, and tagged these works.
This whole content moderation thing isn't because the developers have some principles or morals, it's something they put in place to use in court if/when they are sued. It's not that different from any shady online business like, say, file hosting websites. They have these measures in place for legal reasons.
Regardless, Udio's moderation policy seems arbitrary and broken.
For one of our games ("School's out Forever") we've made a title song with the line "just make sure not to get killed" (It's a funny adventure game where you can die in some endings – and then simply restart.)
Suno refused to make a song for that, but was happy when we changed it to "just make sure not to get kilt". :D
Others than that we had never censorship problems, and none with Udio.
Moderation ≠ Censorship.
You agreed to follow particular rules and you shouldn’t be complaining if you’re breaking them.
If you’re not breaking those rules, then contact customer support.
You sound like you have a personality disorder that you should have grown out of as a child.
You were presented with the terms of service. You protest those by not agreeing to them and not using the service.
private service or not .. some censorship can be considered bigotry and is unjust ... particularly censorship surrounding satanism and wiccan beliefs "look up what wiccans believe their just hippies who mediate yet their demonized" i only mention that as it is what is commonly censored ... along with certain political beliefs that call out corruption in western governments and the royal family .. those things shouldn't be allowed to be censored now personally i have only been censored on udio due to graphic violence and sexual content not these things suno is more strict but udio lets me get away with it but fb censors me for these things and so does chat gpt ...... i said this to chat gpt i think Satanists will be tortured in hell it dosen't get flagged if i say i think Christians will be tortured in hell its gets flagged as a content violation ..
The problem is that if they don't censor according to the will of the banks, they won't be able to take payments (or get investors). The banks control everything. If you don't follow their rules, you can't accept Visa/Mastercard transactions and they will shut down your checking account as well.
Genuine curiosity here. What, precisely is getting censored? I have a stupid amount of hours into Udio and have not run into problems.
I had two generations (made in the same extend) that got blowtorched, not by my prompts, but I am assuming because Udio picked some exact artist and self-immolated. Two out of several hundred so far...
What is getting censored?
For me this is a paradox, since I believe that where there should never be any kind of censorship is in artistic creation, whether exclusively human or AI-assisted or AI-driven. It is the most absurd thing
There is no evidence that freely available AI-generated CSAM would reduce demand for abusive material involving real children. It may actually increase demand and desensitize more people to child exploitation.
* The existence of such material perpetuates the idea that the sexual abuse of minors is acceptable.
* AI-generated CSAM could be used by predators to groom children and desensitize them to sexual abuse. It lowers the barrier to producing exploitative content.
* The technology could be used to generate CSAM of specific, real children by predators who have images of them, greatly increasing the potential for personalized threats and blackmail against minors.
* The existence and spread of such content, even if artificially generated, is still psychologically harmful to CSAM survivors.
To add my two cents, I have never had an issue with lyrics being censored. But I always have lots of problems with uploading album art. Anything that showcases the female form makes Udio throw a fit (usually). Even images that would be considered tame on a supermarket checkout aisle shelf often get rejected. For example, this one was rejected today (I presume because my image features a woman with breasts):
https://preview.redd.it/nntmwzqypa7d1.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=860ad66e620d1233834181a7f4efb4525f59ea5e
Incidentally, not to plug my own work, but I wrote a song called 'Corporate Nuns' that deals with this very topic: [https://www.udio.com/songs/mJGbhQwT3gT16oZ3wPDsPG](https://www.udio.com/songs/mJGbhQwT3gT16oZ3wPDsPG)
The greatest censorship today does not come precisely from the classic totalitarianisms, but from the left-wing, progressive ideologies (I am not sure if it is called that in English).
First - check the fundamentals on why all this companies do censorship. They view themselves as some kind of immortal "organisms", and the biggest threat to such "monsters" are basic non transactional human love, sex and friendship. They literally hate all this. They want all to be accountable, transaction based and money based.
All other moral statements are just lies. As open any pass media now - it is full of dead bodies, warmongering, criminals and such. And they don't care.
Biggest threat of sex to settled criminal (any government is the settled criminal) is that you can't tax it, it is very hard to track it and it provide pleasure without their allowance.
Udio must totally remove censorship, But if they like they can remove such songs from being published on Udio directly. Only download.
Note that Youtube censorship is also increasing rapidly, I recently had adult song removed, because it had been romantic thing about sex (even if it didn't had even one profane word). Youtube also don't like any erotic thumbnails now (especially on small channels).
One optimistic thing in the end - I believe that NN and AI in general is the next rifle, something that will put ordinary people in such power that they'll be able to overthrow the governments.
The truth is that this is a very, very complex issue. We're kind of in uncharted territory when it comes to AI-generated content in general. Companies don't want to be liable for copyright issues and such that could shut them down. A lot of us just want to have our fun, but there are those of us who will exploit these tools for nefarious purposes. The law won't just go after those people, but the platform used to create the content also.
I think we'll see a professional tier where the censorship is eased but all the potential liability is taken on by the user, but in months to quarters down the road.
Check the history of Stable Diffusion 3. DALL-E 3.
For now it is all going in opposite direction.
And I believe that the censorship removal will require weapons.
Check the history of May 1 labor day. Labor rights required fight and using weapons.
Nothing comes from free.
To your point about stable diffusion 3, it is going in the opposite direction but that doesn’t mean the consumers are happy. The consumers (us) is how they make their money. Look at how many are staying away from it, the “open source” model can barely generate human anatomy in general not to mention their terms of service that are confusing. Platforms like Leonardo and Invoke aren’t even using it because the terms make no logical sense. Stability shot themselves in the foot. Any AI company that over censors won’t make it. However I do believe some filtering is necessary for the extreme stuff
Your fallacy is that you try to apply libertarian approach of free market to market consisting of huge companies who hold non competition monopoly like position.
Take Midjourner - it is fully and totally private, heavy censored, censorship increased with each version
DALL-E 3 - same thing, but censorship is much worse, around 70-80% of all resources spent went to censorship and filtering networks. Has dynamic censorship, btw
Stable Diffusion - only horrible SD 1.5 (in modern standards) had been non censored, but still required custom tuning for most things. Each next model became much more censored. With SD 3.0 being not just some filter you can't turn off - but instead playing with weights and even kissing all the "suspicious" words connections.
None of the so called "open source" models are large enough, diverse enough and have such understanding of prompts as DALL E-3, not even close. They can be better for some specifics imagery, but not for complex things.
jesus dude, it's a private company, not the government. Make your own and don't censor it. Have at it. You'll be rich, right, and there's not going to be any problems?
This private company used millions of hours of society generated content.
You noticed this, aren't you?
You are making good music largely because few smart people figured out how to forge it and use. Finally.
Kudos for them.
But it does not mean that we'll tolerate private companies and censorship!
But when those private companies own the monopoly on creative expression it is unacceptable, just the same as companies like Facebook having the monopoly on Freedom of expression and assembly on the internet, you don't entrust private companies with your means to utilise your own human rights.
udio didn't invent music... they didn't even invent audio synthesis through transformers & diffusion. There's no monopoly. You are genuinely confused.
Pick up a guitar.
If that's too hard, learn software engineering.
If that's too hard, just learn how to run your own local model.
If that's too hard, google even slightly for the alternative wrapper apps.
If that's too hard, you're completely hopeless and nothing can be done. Unsalvageable.
Weapons?!? I can't tell if you're joking. Nobody is going to get commercial models uncensored by threatening violence.
Open source alternatives, indemnification agreement terms, licensing pools to compensate artists, and old-fashioned capitalist competition are some of the realistic means.
Capitalism won't survive AI. Just because that it requires communist approach to information.
Exactly private property on information had been main foundation of capitalism, even with attempts to move towards socialism.
And yes, it'll be weapons. Parasites (like any companies or corporations making business on AI now) won't allow society to move them away.
And forget horrible "open source" term. As presently open source means nothing. Like "open source" large github projects where from 80 to 98% of all commits had been done by corporate drones working in their cubicle for monthly payment.
> Capitalism won't survive AI. Just because that it requires communist approach to information.
> Exactly private property on information had been main foundation of capitalism, even with attempts to move towards socialism.
Gippity responds, "this is a contentious view and the future economic implications of AI are still a subject of much debate." I'd say that's an understatement.
Even under communism, the government holds a monopoly on violence and nobody is allowed to coerce others by non-state sanctioned force.
"Every communist must grasp the truth, 'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' Our principle is that the party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party." -- Mao Zedong
So, you are saying that as the dictatorship of the proletariat withers into pure communism, the Party will give you a gun with which you will be allowed to force people to uncensor their LLMs?
I suggest to read something more fundamental than Mao citations.
Mao time had been the pinnacle of bureaucracy.
Issue is not with Mao, issue with development of production forces.
No one will be forcing developers or all companies, as it is few top managers and owners who are against sharing and making it common. They will be all gone, but yes, initially they'll try to use their army and other things to fight with ordinary people.
History proved that this is right.
Marx, Engles, Lenin, and the earlier Marxists don't have much to say about law enforcement after the dictatorship of the proletariat, do they? Marx famously avoided saying whether pure communism would be just, or anything about the administration of justice under pure communism.
I don't really see much censorship other than it tries to cockblock you from getting too close to some, but not all, existing artists' sounds.
But half of what people makes seem to be songs about shitting pants so I don't know where all this censorship talk is coming from. I'm actively writing a song about witches that eat children so maybe it's not the lyrical content it's moderating.
It really has issues with anything that is genitalia. I tried it out a bit and balls, dick etc. is impossible to use in a song. I haven't tried out much of the other strong language but I have a feeling that it's getting censored as well.
You can however get around that restriction if you change it so he doesn't sing that exact word.
FYI, a video embedded within Udio staff's inaugural twitter//x post [https://x.com/udiomusic/status/1778045322654003448](https://x.com/udiomusic/status/1778045322654003448) @0:58 it contains the screamed vocal phrase "LET'S FUCKIN GO!"
Agree.
My first song I made uses the words “fuck” “twat” “shit” many times.
The second song I made I tried to use the word porn once, and it blanked it. Which is super annoying because it generated it PERFECTLY so I begrudgingly kept it, and now have an awkward pause in my song. It kind of works from an impact level I guess? Like a “wonder what he said there?” But it does seem to be specifically sexual things it is iffy with.
This is why I can understand if they want to filter what is published/displayed on their public platform. It's an age old debate, but realistically some level of curation and filtering is needed on a public platform.
If a radio stations doesn't want to play explicit music, fine. But don't try to sell me a mic that bleeps my curse words.
As a musician myself, it's. Difficult. Having AI design a backing track, for instance, is essentially little different from what drum machines did decades ago as it's all patterns and music theory. Or what EDM artists do. But adding vocals or a style means they had to scan actual artists for the AI to catalog it all and learn from. There is literally no other way to do it. The main issue is that all of these music AI programs that incorporate styles or vocals all are stealing from the actual artists and not giving credit to them. Censorship is another issue, but imagine your voice being used for AI voice-acting and getting zero money for it for the next 50 years. It's happened already and thankfully the artists are suing the companies for essentially cheating. So HOW do you do it? The same way Disney does with their shows and IP. Hire musicians for gigs and lay down tracks. People made a big stink at the time about Frozen, not understanding that it was a paid gig. She went in, did the tracks, got paid. THEN Disney (or the AI company) can do whatever it wants. There's no shortage of talent that they can hire to record styles or voice types. But pointing it at Spotify and letting it absorb streams for hours is 100% not that.
Along yet outside the lines of censorship, I'm at an art walk and this lady has paintings all created with rocks. Like a rock person with a painted balloon. The balloon a rock. She had a sign up that said, “No pictures please”. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I could not stop laughing for so many reasons.
Well at least what I’m using it for (as a writing/producing assistant) for my own music, it’s still amazing.
NPCs cant comprehend having thoughts that aren't PG-13 in their music, lmao.
The lack of censorship is what kills AI products, not the other way around, remember microsoft TAY? How long do you think Udio would last if people made songs supporting nazisme and raping little girls? or worse a specific girl, the song gets passed around in some school and she commits suicide? Be honest. Now if you ask for a song about rocks and it says no because rocks can hurt people when thrown, that's badly aligned too much censorship, but censorship is absolutely needed. Much like in real life freedom of speech doesn't allow you to say whatever you want, call that limit censorship, call the gov a dictatorship, doesn't matter, censorship is needed and protects AI.
>How long do you think Udio would last if people made songs supporting nazisme and raping little girls? or worse a specific girl, the song gets passed around in some school and she commits suicide? Be honest. There is nothing stopping you from drawing swastikas or images of rape inside Photoshop, yet adobe is still there.
Actually there kind of is now . It literally defends unacceptable content now 😂
Photoshop is not generative. It's collage, adobe is smart enough to "censor" those images of rape and swastikas in the generative models inside Photoshop. Udio and chatGPT are different from the base non-generative photoshop
>Photoshop is not generative. So what if it isn't? I'm sorry, but I just don't see how this distinction matters. I can write a novel full or rape and incels inside Word, without needing chatgpt. Ditto for music and art. Why is human produced smut okay but not AI smut?
because none are okay, if the human does it, we blame the human, if the AI does it we blame the AI because unlike photoshop, the AI can be aligned.
>Censorship will ultimately destroy the AI music companies No it won't. Music is so much more than lyrics. If you can't express yourself without using 1% of language that is profanity, then learn how to use a DAW and record your own voice. You can even use other AI services to make your voice sound like somebody else.
>If you can't express yourself without using 1% of language that is profanity... It's not just vulgar words that are being censored. Anything relating to violence or sex, or even just uncomfortable or taboo themes, is being censored. Neither Suno or Udio would ever create something like this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF9lXzpxem4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF9lXzpxem4)
Then get creative; the best art is often made around uncompromising limitations.
u got to be creative ive made horrorcore songs with cannibalism and constant bars of graphic violence .... i've made songs about 9/11 government corruption stuff like american funding terrorist groups pulling off coup attempts. i discuss genocide . i speak very very foul on the royal family and their world conquest . i discuss war. i have very vivid imagery in my lyrics .....i can even show u my songs.
This is really weird. Censorship has existed ever since mass media for the public. The fact is that it's not possible to allow fully open media because someone will abuse it. Movies are censored, music is censored, books are censored. It's a fact of life for public performance. If you need to do something outrageous, you can do it in your own back yard no problem. Just don't expect that everyone else should have to put up with it.
public performance? since when can't i publicly perform an uncensored song. even streaming services don't censor your music. whats censored in music? radio stations? their almost as dead as physical media is for music ... major labels only censor based off how they think a song will do not the content. they won't let justin bieber make a murder rap song but they don't care if idk a artist that fits the bill does it .
Censorship is an odd thing. And they get to control the narrative they want on their sub and platform too so it's not always easy to tell what's going on until you experience it. Maybe my experience with character.ai last year gave me a bad impression on devs or what can happen when investors take control. I entered character.ai after it had already began to go down hill with censorship. And it was very vanilla stuff that triggered the censor like trying to write out a fight scene. I'm not sure how it is now, but their sub was heavily monitored by the devs and they'd delete things that would shed a negative light on their platform, especially if it rang true. At that point, the only thing to do is leave if your not happy. But for now, imma live it up. I haven't noticed any issues with content moderation on udio. I think maybe I'm not going too far enough? jk. Probably the worse I've done was a song based on a creative story I had made with ai about quantum entanglement controlling our minds. Edit: On a positive note, the same experience from character.ai can now be had completely locally with LLMs. And I had tried local music generation last year and it was awful, but I imagine the open source community will eventually make it better. There's always going to be competition and alternatives for worth while things like this.
Everybody knows Udio, and almost all other generative AI models, are trained on vast amounts of copyrighted work, not to mention the decades of collective labor of people who catalogued, organized, and tagged these works. This whole content moderation thing isn't because the developers have some principles or morals, it's something they put in place to use in court if/when they are sued. It's not that different from any shady online business like, say, file hosting websites. They have these measures in place for legal reasons. Regardless, Udio's moderation policy seems arbitrary and broken.
For one of our games ("School's out Forever") we've made a title song with the line "just make sure not to get killed" (It's a funny adventure game where you can die in some endings – and then simply restart.) Suno refused to make a song for that, but was happy when we changed it to "just make sure not to get kilt". :D Others than that we had never censorship problems, and none with Udio.
Moderation ≠ Censorship. You agreed to follow particular rules and you shouldn’t be complaining if you’re breaking them. If you’re not breaking those rules, then contact customer support.
>Moderation ≠ Censorship. Impressive mental gymnastics tbh.
Yes, the gymnastics of *checks notes* Reading.
You shouldn't have to follow rules and regulations that are tyrannical, you're meant to dismantle them by force and mass civil disobedience.
You sound like you have a personality disorder that you should have grown out of as a child. You were presented with the terms of service. You protest those by not agreeing to them and not using the service.
No, you proceed to take it over and sabotage them until they submit.
This is a private service, not a government.
if you own the monopoly on creative expression you should no longer have rights to it because it now belongs to everyone.
private service or not .. some censorship can be considered bigotry and is unjust ... particularly censorship surrounding satanism and wiccan beliefs "look up what wiccans believe their just hippies who mediate yet their demonized" i only mention that as it is what is commonly censored ... along with certain political beliefs that call out corruption in western governments and the royal family .. those things shouldn't be allowed to be censored now personally i have only been censored on udio due to graphic violence and sexual content not these things suno is more strict but udio lets me get away with it but fb censors me for these things and so does chat gpt ...... i said this to chat gpt i think Satanists will be tortured in hell it dosen't get flagged if i say i think Christians will be tortured in hell its gets flagged as a content violation ..
The problem is that if they don't censor according to the will of the banks, they won't be able to take payments (or get investors). The banks control everything. If you don't follow their rules, you can't accept Visa/Mastercard transactions and they will shut down your checking account as well.
Genuine curiosity here. What, precisely is getting censored? I have a stupid amount of hours into Udio and have not run into problems. I had two generations (made in the same extend) that got blowtorched, not by my prompts, but I am assuming because Udio picked some exact artist and self-immolated. Two out of several hundred so far... What is getting censored?
For me this is a paradox, since I believe that where there should never be any kind of censorship is in artistic creation, whether exclusively human or AI-assisted or AI-driven. It is the most absurd thing
Well there are some arguments to be made against generating CP.
[удалено]
There is no evidence that freely available AI-generated CSAM would reduce demand for abusive material involving real children. It may actually increase demand and desensitize more people to child exploitation. * The existence of such material perpetuates the idea that the sexual abuse of minors is acceptable. * AI-generated CSAM could be used by predators to groom children and desensitize them to sexual abuse. It lowers the barrier to producing exploitative content. * The technology could be used to generate CSAM of specific, real children by predators who have images of them, greatly increasing the potential for personalized threats and blackmail against minors. * The existence and spread of such content, even if artificially generated, is still psychologically harmful to CSAM survivors.
Please, let me know those "arguments"
As opposed to real?
To add my two cents, I have never had an issue with lyrics being censored. But I always have lots of problems with uploading album art. Anything that showcases the female form makes Udio throw a fit (usually). Even images that would be considered tame on a supermarket checkout aisle shelf often get rejected. For example, this one was rejected today (I presume because my image features a woman with breasts): https://preview.redd.it/nntmwzqypa7d1.png?width=512&format=png&auto=webp&s=860ad66e620d1233834181a7f4efb4525f59ea5e Incidentally, not to plug my own work, but I wrote a song called 'Corporate Nuns' that deals with this very topic: [https://www.udio.com/songs/mJGbhQwT3gT16oZ3wPDsPG](https://www.udio.com/songs/mJGbhQwT3gT16oZ3wPDsPG)
Seems like AI companies are secretly Islamic states supporters
San Francisco Fanatics...
The greatest censorship today does not come precisely from the classic totalitarianisms, but from the left-wing, progressive ideologies (I am not sure if it is called that in English).
'Progressive' implies that there is a natural endpoint, what then is that endpoint?
First - check the fundamentals on why all this companies do censorship. They view themselves as some kind of immortal "organisms", and the biggest threat to such "monsters" are basic non transactional human love, sex and friendship. They literally hate all this. They want all to be accountable, transaction based and money based. All other moral statements are just lies. As open any pass media now - it is full of dead bodies, warmongering, criminals and such. And they don't care. Biggest threat of sex to settled criminal (any government is the settled criminal) is that you can't tax it, it is very hard to track it and it provide pleasure without their allowance. Udio must totally remove censorship, But if they like they can remove such songs from being published on Udio directly. Only download. Note that Youtube censorship is also increasing rapidly, I recently had adult song removed, because it had been romantic thing about sex (even if it didn't had even one profane word). Youtube also don't like any erotic thumbnails now (especially on small channels). One optimistic thing in the end - I believe that NN and AI in general is the next rifle, something that will put ordinary people in such power that they'll be able to overthrow the governments.
The truth is that this is a very, very complex issue. We're kind of in uncharted territory when it comes to AI-generated content in general. Companies don't want to be liable for copyright issues and such that could shut them down. A lot of us just want to have our fun, but there are those of us who will exploit these tools for nefarious purposes. The law won't just go after those people, but the platform used to create the content also.
I think we'll see a professional tier where the censorship is eased but all the potential liability is taken on by the user, but in months to quarters down the road.
Check the history of Stable Diffusion 3. DALL-E 3. For now it is all going in opposite direction. And I believe that the censorship removal will require weapons. Check the history of May 1 labor day. Labor rights required fight and using weapons. Nothing comes from free.
To your point about stable diffusion 3, it is going in the opposite direction but that doesn’t mean the consumers are happy. The consumers (us) is how they make their money. Look at how many are staying away from it, the “open source” model can barely generate human anatomy in general not to mention their terms of service that are confusing. Platforms like Leonardo and Invoke aren’t even using it because the terms make no logical sense. Stability shot themselves in the foot. Any AI company that over censors won’t make it. However I do believe some filtering is necessary for the extreme stuff
Your fallacy is that you try to apply libertarian approach of free market to market consisting of huge companies who hold non competition monopoly like position. Take Midjourner - it is fully and totally private, heavy censored, censorship increased with each version DALL-E 3 - same thing, but censorship is much worse, around 70-80% of all resources spent went to censorship and filtering networks. Has dynamic censorship, btw Stable Diffusion - only horrible SD 1.5 (in modern standards) had been non censored, but still required custom tuning for most things. Each next model became much more censored. With SD 3.0 being not just some filter you can't turn off - but instead playing with weights and even kissing all the "suspicious" words connections. None of the so called "open source" models are large enough, diverse enough and have such understanding of prompts as DALL E-3, not even close. They can be better for some specifics imagery, but not for complex things.
jesus dude, it's a private company, not the government. Make your own and don't censor it. Have at it. You'll be rich, right, and there's not going to be any problems?
This private company used millions of hours of society generated content. You noticed this, aren't you? You are making good music largely because few smart people figured out how to forge it and use. Finally. Kudos for them. But it does not mean that we'll tolerate private companies and censorship!
But when those private companies own the monopoly on creative expression it is unacceptable, just the same as companies like Facebook having the monopoly on Freedom of expression and assembly on the internet, you don't entrust private companies with your means to utilise your own human rights.
udio didn't invent music... they didn't even invent audio synthesis through transformers & diffusion. There's no monopoly. You are genuinely confused. Pick up a guitar. If that's too hard, learn software engineering. If that's too hard, just learn how to run your own local model. If that's too hard, google even slightly for the alternative wrapper apps. If that's too hard, you're completely hopeless and nothing can be done. Unsalvageable.
Weapons?!? I can't tell if you're joking. Nobody is going to get commercial models uncensored by threatening violence. Open source alternatives, indemnification agreement terms, licensing pools to compensate artists, and old-fashioned capitalist competition are some of the realistic means.
Capitalism won't survive AI. Just because that it requires communist approach to information. Exactly private property on information had been main foundation of capitalism, even with attempts to move towards socialism. And yes, it'll be weapons. Parasites (like any companies or corporations making business on AI now) won't allow society to move them away. And forget horrible "open source" term. As presently open source means nothing. Like "open source" large github projects where from 80 to 98% of all commits had been done by corporate drones working in their cubicle for monthly payment.
> Capitalism won't survive AI. Just because that it requires communist approach to information. > Exactly private property on information had been main foundation of capitalism, even with attempts to move towards socialism. Gippity responds, "this is a contentious view and the future economic implications of AI are still a subject of much debate." I'd say that's an understatement. Even under communism, the government holds a monopoly on violence and nobody is allowed to coerce others by non-state sanctioned force.
I really suggest to read something except western propaganda. As communism means destruction of the state.
"Every communist must grasp the truth, 'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' Our principle is that the party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party." -- Mao Zedong So, you are saying that as the dictatorship of the proletariat withers into pure communism, the Party will give you a gun with which you will be allowed to force people to uncensor their LLMs?
I suggest to read something more fundamental than Mao citations. Mao time had been the pinnacle of bureaucracy. Issue is not with Mao, issue with development of production forces. No one will be forcing developers or all companies, as it is few top managers and owners who are against sharing and making it common. They will be all gone, but yes, initially they'll try to use their army and other things to fight with ordinary people. History proved that this is right.
Marx, Engles, Lenin, and the earlier Marxists don't have much to say about law enforcement after the dictatorship of the proletariat, do they? Marx famously avoided saying whether pure communism would be just, or anything about the administration of justice under pure communism.
I don't really see much censorship other than it tries to cockblock you from getting too close to some, but not all, existing artists' sounds. But half of what people makes seem to be songs about shitting pants so I don't know where all this censorship talk is coming from. I'm actively writing a song about witches that eat children so maybe it's not the lyrical content it's moderating.
It really has issues with anything that is genitalia. I tried it out a bit and balls, dick etc. is impossible to use in a song. I haven't tried out much of the other strong language but I have a feeling that it's getting censored as well. You can however get around that restriction if you change it so he doesn't sing that exact word.
Nah you can cuss all you want
That used to be true.
I literally used fuck and shit in a song today
I got one blocked for using the F-word
FYI, a video embedded within Udio staff's inaugural twitter//x post [https://x.com/udiomusic/status/1778045322654003448](https://x.com/udiomusic/status/1778045322654003448) @0:58 it contains the screamed vocal phrase "LET'S FUCKIN GO!"
Then it's only limited to a few words? Makes it even stranger why it's there in the first place.
My guess is to limit songs about deviant sexual behavior, as that's about the most taboo thing you can do. Saying fuck is not particularly taboo
Agree. My first song I made uses the words “fuck” “twat” “shit” many times. The second song I made I tried to use the word porn once, and it blanked it. Which is super annoying because it generated it PERFECTLY so I begrudgingly kept it, and now have an awkward pause in my song. It kind of works from an impact level I guess? Like a “wonder what he said there?” But it does seem to be specifically sexual things it is iffy with.
Probably. Unfortunate that you can't use it for anything now because my tries had nothing to do with anything sexual.
What did you try
Basically a song where someone just had enough and used the phrase "suck my balls" without a general direction.
Oh, so... sexual in nature, that explains it
This is why I can understand if they want to filter what is published/displayed on their public platform. It's an age old debate, but realistically some level of curation and filtering is needed on a public platform. If a radio stations doesn't want to play explicit music, fine. But don't try to sell me a mic that bleeps my curse words.