The Dance Hall 13: When You Dance on the Ice and Your Feet Twizzle Twice, That's Amore

With those scores, Piper and Paul can say goodbye to an Olympic medal. :drama: F-B/C are winning the gold! /sarcasm šŸ˜‰
 
Sorry to crash in here without reading all 933 previous posts, but how did we get into this dystopia where Reed & Ambrulevicius are Olympic medal threats? :confused:
Well, some would argue we've been in this dystopian universe for this entire Olympic cycle where too many teams well past their sell-date have stayed far too long at the fair.
 
Them not qualifying for the FD at Worlds turned out to be a big win in defeat for them.
The consensus was that they kinda peaked with their bronze at the home Euros, but here they are starting the Olympic season super strong. I know it's mostly because they had to come very prepared and very early in the season to secure the Olympic spot. But having one of the very few decent RDs of the season doesn't hurt either
 
I suspect without the botched lift Gilles/Poirier would have won easily. I'll be surprised if they make the same error again.

I think it's too early to write off any top teams based on a single comp. There's still plenty of time for them to catch up to those who started their comptition seasons a couple of months ago. Though some might need more work than others (cough Guignard/Fabbri cough).
 
The comments in my mind are giving, R/A are looking pretty good, and they have two very decent programs. They could be top 5. Let's make it to the GPF to draw more serious conclusions.
 
I do think that C/B & G/P should be worried about their PCS though, (albeit G/P will have lost out a little because they had the kind of mistake that means PR is capped at no more than 9). The gap with F/G has really closed & the top teams from the last couple of seasons really don't have the buffer for mistakes that they'd had previously.
 
An interesting blog post about the AI-generated music that Mrazkova/Mrazek are using in their Rhythm Dance.

I thought generative AI was supposed to take a prompt such as ā€œa song in the style of 1990s Bon Joviā€ and in extracting and regurgitating all of the information it’s been trained to use without any regard for copyright infringement, it’ll mix and match things at least enough to not just use one single source verbatim. Apparently I was wrong – as much as I joke that artificial intelligence is ā€œall A and no I,ā€ it’s even dumber than I realized. Not only did it take every lyric other than ā€œHey!ā€ and ā€œYow!ā€ word-for-word from the 90s alt-rock one-hit wonder ā€œYou Get What You Giveā€ by the New Radicals (including the ā€œone, twoā€ intro as a gibberish song title) – even if you don’t give a shit about the blatant disregard for stealing someone’s intellectual property, you must at least acknowledge how objectively un-Bon-Jovi that song is.

 
My guess is there is no law yet regarding AI so it's a loophole they found to get through the season? We need to wait for Taylor Swift to take it on I guess?
In terms of authors, there's already been a settled class action suit for books used by AI without permission, so I'm sure we'll start seeing lawsuits from musicians and artists for copyright infringement. But overall it's pretty much the Wild West at the moment when it comes to AI and copyright. But in this case, the plagiarism seems pretty blatant to me. I like the Mrazeks a lot and also sympathize with their financial situation but they really need to change their music (which is pretty awful IMHO) immediately.
 
It depends on how much they use of each song. I vaguely remember you can sample a song up to a certain number of bars without copyright, otherwise a whole lottaDJs would be in trouble.
so maybe AI can take snippets from dozens of songs and make a recording? Sounds lovely.

If there is copyright I don't see why it would matter if its AI rather than some other form of use. Except of course that is how dominant corporations continually flout regulations by claiming this is something different so not subject to the laws. :blah:
 
It depends on how much they use of each song. I vaguely remember you can sample a song up to a certain number of bars without copyright, otherwise a whole lottaDJs would be in trouble.
Apparently, that's up to interpretation and there's no set amount of bars/time. The context of the use matters a fair bit. In case of song lyrics, for instance, you usually can't even quote a single line of a song's lyrics in a book without paying permission fees.
 
I didn't even catch that the AI song was pieced together from You Get What You Give. I've been yelling for people to use that actual song since the 90s theme was announced!
 
So the band doesn't exist anymore, but members are still in the music industry. Even if there is nothing legally to be done, I do think the artists should at least be aware their music is being stolen and used by ai.

Very disappointed by this whole situation.
 
OMG. I singled out the AI lyrics as nonsensical trash, and cite ā€œFirst we run and then we laugh till we cryā€ as nonsense. Finding out these are real lyrics to a song I know has blown my mind in the worst way possible.
I immediately clocked that line and the first one as the New Radicals song, but also my son loves that song so it's still on heavy rotation in this house hahahaha
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information