AI generated music, AI generated blogs etc, is really a stupid idea. Maybe some people want it, but I really don't. I really don't care if the music is great (it's not, I'm a musician). I really don't care if the writing is great or the content is great.

Its like being kosher. Some people choose to not eat non kosher food. I choose not to consume AI generated materials.

What if AI cures cancer? Sure, let it cure cancer. I still don't want to read it. Some other people will read it. It still hasn't cured cancer yet though.

I do use AI in my day job as SWE, not by my own choice, but forced by the industry. It does good works, but if I have a choice, yeah I really don't need to, or want to.

I am just a peasant tossed back and fro by the rich, so I know my place, and keep my head down to do whatever necessary to live, but not more. I can choose what I am being kosher about.

I think it would be great if the world has 2 economies. AI and non AI economies. The more we can identify which one is AI and which one is not, the better the outcome for people like me.

I approve of AI image and video generation but for music I can't get myself to feel the same way, except for novelty/meme songs maybe.

I think it's because it's so much sneakier, I'm usually focused on something else and listening to music and it takes me a minute to realize something's off.

AI images and videos at least, for now, I can recognize the majority of the time and they don't have that primal connection to my brain that music does.

This is in response to a possibly (?) AI generated cover of "Like a Prayer" topping Australian radio play charts in July and ARIA deciding it was illegitimate.

>But the track, released by Queensland-based DJ and producer Josh Fawaz, has angered some in the music industry who believe it was produced with artificial intelligence-powered audio engineering software.

> ABC News has contacted Fawaz multiple times this week to seek his response to the criticism, but he has not responded.[1]

I think Ben Lee's point in the NYTimes article is good:

> The Australian musician Ben Lee, who is known for hits like “Cigarettes Will Kill You” and “Catch My Disease,” said non-generative A.I. was used by artists in the process of music production, including for pitch correction and noise reduction. But generative A.I. and its impacts on the industry needed to be looked at more closely, he said.

> “I’m not the kind of person who is at all fundamentally opposed to technological changes in my industry,” he said. “It feels like healthy pushback is a really vital part of us looking responsibly at the way to integrate these technologies into our industries.”

I remember when autotune came out and people wanted to ban that too.

The rules seem pretty loose:

> For example, if a song’s lead vocal or key instrumental performance is generated by A.I., the track would be ineligible, ARIA said. But a human lead vocal with A.I. backing vocals would be allowed.

[1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-07-10/most-played-song-in-a...

Comment on the video page of the song that sparked this:

“ No lol. We don’t need more over privileged musicians leading luxurious lives while the rest of us slave away. I’d rather support this if leads to less inequality.

No more Rihanna’s and Guy Sebastian etc”

Are these the same Recording Industry Associations who are so good at predicting tech trends they took the opportunities the Internet gave them and decided to focus the efforts on suing torrenters?

Have generative AI create the music and then become a cover artist for AI generated music. No one will notice. Lots of musicians are cover artists because perhaps they are skilled in their playing instruments and or singing but have a hard time coming up with good music. So instead let AI come up with the music and just copy it and make it yours.

I’m not clear exactly how much official charts matter anymore except to industry insiders. For better or worse, the real charts are now in the metrics of the streaming apps.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/25/world/australia/australia...

Is Australia a "banning lab" or something. (Disclaimer: I'm an Australian citizen)

Will people stop listening to AI music just because associations ban it? Pop hits were essentially "human slop" - highly formulaic and catering to the least common denominator. I see no problem in people liking it, but I'm not sure if AI making the music is a huge problem. I won't listen to it anyway.

This is the right path.

Interesting so far the majority of the comments here are for typing into a textbox (no talent needed) to create songs vs. hating AI Music.

I do use Suno to turn my real human songs into polished tracks. I'm not a good singer and in earshot ppl like my AI produced songs. Though, I go in waves of listening only to my AI stuff to being uninspired & not listening to it.

A weird thing happened to me on a recent date where i got AI Music catfished (https://ryanspahn.substack.com/p/new-trend-ai-music-catfishi...). My date was catfishing not their looks but their talents as a singer / even a musician. Weird, but maybe not so weird in a few years...

"Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA)" official charts, not Australia the country's official charts (which probably do not exist).

I mean, good, maybe if this is intended to preserve the value of human-produced art and/or to limit the scope of official charts. But I'm not sure how you actually prove this or thus justify any particular instance of enforcement.

So completely unnecessary.

https://unwall.app/www.nytimes.com/2026/08/25/world/australi...

Now ban corporately produced music.

lol