Poisonify
We stand at a pivotal moment, witnessing artificial intelligence rapidly integrating into our lives. It evokes parallels with the Industrial Revolution, roughly 300 years ago, when steam power replaced animal labor. Back then, technology liberated us from physical toil. But the current AI revolution presents a fundamentally different challenge: it’s poised to replace our cognitive abilities, our very “brains.”
While some champion this progress, captivated by future possibilities and unburdened by societal safeguards, a critical issue remains unaddressed. Protecting ourselves from a technology still in its nascent stages is inherently difficult.
This is starkly evident in the realm of music. The “genie is out of the bottle” with AI music generation. Over the past few years, numerous companies have developed computer models to “compose” music faster and cheaper than human artists.
The crux of the problem lies in their training methods: these models are often built upon illegally scraped, unprotected music found online.
Imagine someone breaking into your meticulously equipped personal gym, painstakingly built over years. They secretly study your routines, utilize your equipment, and then emerge to outperform you in every competition, mimicking your hard-earned skills and knowledge. While they may not yet possess independent creativity, they are rapidly becoming better and faster emulators of human artistry.
Unsurprisingly, musicians are resisting this situation and seeking protection. However, the slow and complex legislative process risks becoming obsolete before adequate legal frameworks are in place. By then, AI models will have absorbed vast musical knowledge and moved onto further stages of development.
Faced with this inertia, some musicians are taking a proactive, almost retaliatory approach to protect their intellectual property, employing methods reminiscent of the AI’s initial data acquisition. This is the concept behind “Poisonify.”
I have learned about this from Benn Jordan and his YouTube video The Art of Poison-Pilling Music Files, which actually inspired me to write this post.
“Poisoning” involves musicians with technical understanding creating specific musical works designed to confuse and corrupt the training data of AI models. Using the gym analogy, it’s like sabotaging the equipment to hinder the intruders’ training.
The long-term efficacy of this self-defense strategy remains uncertain. It feels like a David and Goliath battle, where musicians are throwing pebbles at a powerful entity seemingly indifferent to the nuances and value of human-created music.
This disregard is chillingly illustrated by the statement of Mikey Shulman, the Co-Founder and CEO of Suno AI – currently the most developed generative artificial intelligence music creation program:
It’s not really enjoyable to make music now. I think the majority of people don’t enjoy the majority of the time they spend making music. ????
This reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of the intricate and deeply human process of music creation. If you want to learn more about the ‘delusional reality’ this guy lives in, you can watch the whole interview here.
This perspective echoes a dangerous societal notion – the devaluation of organic creation and cultural identity in favor of convenient, readily available substitutes. It is akin to suggesting immigration can replace the intrinsic value of raising one’s own family and nurturing a nation’s culture.
The future of this countermeasure to “poisonify” or AI-proof music is unclear. History suggests that “poison” as a solution often yields limited and potentially harmful results, as seen with pesticides and their impact on our food and health. Potential legal issues could arise here as well. Generative AI music companies could also train their models to find these poisons and eliminate them.
From reading comments under the Benn Jordan’s video it is very obvious, that there are many musicians, who don’t want their music to get exposed to the AI scraping and therefore keep their music unreleased. At least for the time being.
Ultimately, halting technological evolution, however unsettling, seems improbable. Yet, I firmly believe that technology will not extinguish the fundamental human need for artistic expression and music-making. As I’ve often emphasized here on Musicably, listening to music cannot replace the profound benefits of musicking – of creating music, playing instruments, singing, dancing. My hope is that more individuals will recognize the immense mental, physical, and social well-being derived from personal musical engagement and find the courage to embark on their own musical journeys.
Photo: Screengrab from the Benn Jordan’s video
