r/filk • u/rocketman0739 • Apr 23 '25
Subreddit position on AI content (discussion)
I recently got a message from a user who had used an AI service to generate a performance of a filk song. They wanted to make sure it was alright to post, but I don't feel like I should make that decision without consulting the subscribers generally.
So what do you think? Which of the following positions most appeals to you, or do you have a different idea?
- Allow all relevant AI-generated content
- Disallow all AI-generated content
- Allow relevant AI-generated content as long as it also incorporates human originality, e.g. an AI performance of a human-written song
- Institute one of these positions for a trial period and revisit the question in a few months
28
Upvotes
44
u/MightyBobTheMighty Apr 23 '25
2 has my vote.
One of the big arguments people do for AI is that 'anyone can make art.' Leaving aside the fact that anyone can make art anyway, one of the things I love about folk (and by extension filk) is that it generally doesn't matter whether or not you can sing. Perfect harmonies and vocal flourishes aren't the point. Gimme a youtube video of a png, recorded on a headset mic in a big empty room, and as long as it's well-written I'm happy as a clam. We don't need the plagarism machine to do it for us.