Azeem Azhar

It was called Psychic Octopus

which went through each track and then added more metadata about it, the degree of percussiveness, when the drops were, whether there was a lot of vocal.

And then finally, and this didn't work, Mustafa, and this is to your point about are these things really human or not, I tried to build one that would build my set list so that I could just kind of get onto my decks and mix it.

Start with a track, give it a mood, give it a narrative, how long you want it to be, where to end.

I mean, it does it, but its taste is terrible.

So bad.

Only a robot could listen to that set is my view.

No, no, I went through and did, yeah, a full sort of spectrogram analysis.

So actually, this has triggered another thought, right?

It's about moving from being a taker to a maker.

And that's where the tech industry started.

You know, we were tinkering when writing code on our ZX81s or our Commodore 64s.

And at some point, probably just before the iPhone came out,

Everything was hermetically sealed behind developers and platforms that we used.

And we've got a whole generation of people who've not had to build and make and get that rush.

And maybe what you're describing as well, I'm just thinking live here, is that the way you address the psychosis risk is you get your own personal agency relative to these systems.

by at the very minimum fine-tuning their prompting and then further and further using them as tools and recognizing them in that fourth category that you describe.

So you relate to them differently.

I mean, is that a plausible path?

of course, speaks, I think, to the importance of the discussion we've had relative to this is going to be everywhere.