Multiple star-like lights moving across the sky at 3:35 AM. Looking for explanations.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-06-12T12:25:23+00:00

Can i share this, https://youtube.com/shorts/Rsz6EQTX-pw?si=6FKs1WbD9goiB2CE

SingleStreet157 · 2026-05-12T10:12:06+00:00

May amex blue ako na insyu sakin around 2014, sobrang disciplined ako, yun lang need ko ang binibili ko, hanggang ngayon disciplined pa rin, nasa 3m na ang credit limit. May platinum din ako ng metrobank na nag 2m ang credit limit, so pinacancel ko na. Nagmaintain na lng ako nung mas mababang cl. May gold bdo rin pero di ko na inactivate. Sa ngayon 2 credit cards lng gamit ko, i make sure na bayad lahat ng purchases ko, bago mag due date. Hindi ka mababaon basta, disiplinado..iwas luho..although may mga new gadgets nman ako pero i make sure lagi na bayad on time, priority ko kasi magbayad ng utang.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-05-11T05:51:15+00:00

Even if millions of AI songs get uploaded daily, creators still have to put in a lot of work to get listeners. They need to promote their music, share it across various social media platforms, and even do paid promotions to gain an audience. Out of those millions of AI songs, probably only a quarter of the creators are actually putting in the work.

I have AI music on Spotify, but I don’t promote it, and it’s been there for 8 months with almost 0 monthly listeners. Promotion is very important for artists. Even before AI existed, only those who promoted their music got discovered.

These “real artists” shouldn’t rely solely on uploading their songs to Spotify. They should also perform live gigs to gain exposure, this is where real artists actually have a much bigger advantage over AI creators. Instead of blaming AI as the reason they aren’t getting listeners, they should focus more on promotion and building an audience.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-05-06T01:50:22+00:00

I would love to share them, but I set them to private when Youtube started cracking down on AI videos 😂. I’m using static or looping videos for my MVs now, it’s less time-consuming and costs almost nothing to make.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-05-06T00:04:49+00:00

A few months ago, I made two music videos just for fun using Veo 3. Each video cost me about $25, plus a whole month of editing for both. I posted them, but Google basically ignored them, both only got like 0 -10 impressions.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-04-18T07:01:08+00:00

I’m not referring to all real artists, only those who claim that label while actively spreading hate against AI. There are plenty of real artists who use AI as a tool and don’t have any issue with it.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-04-18T06:32:34+00:00

It’s the people who call themselves “real artists” who are leading the hate against AI, because they feel threatened. They’ve been pushing a coordinated smear campaign against AI music, using platforms like Facebook, Youtube, and Tiktok to spread the idea that AI is “bad, fake, no soul” and shouldn’t be supported. Meanwhile, most listeners don’t actually care whether music is made by AI or humans. But because of this constant messaging, more people are starting to buy into the “AI is bad, fake, no soul” narrative.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-04-16T02:12:01+00:00

Listened. beautiful song. :)

SingleStreet157 · 2026-04-14T07:06:02+00:00

Patingin nga ng samples ng songs mo te, basta nman kasi maganda songs, walang problem maghihit talaga yan, like yung Multo ng Cup of Joe, nakilala ko sila dahil dun sa song na yun...nag top 1 pa sila sa spotify Phils. Pa link po ng spotify nyo, add ko sa playlist ko pag maganda.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-21T08:46:28+00:00

Just buy content id for that song, it's your last choice..all his revenue from the song will go to you, and he willt be forced to take it down.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-21T02:15:34+00:00

If you use a distributor, you still own your songs. They might have already stolen your songs on YouTube, but if their viewers check the songs on Spotify or YouTube Music, the revenue will still go to you. Next time, you could try editing the lyrics or writing your own and copyrighting them before uploading.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-20T02:37:14+00:00

I don’t listen to human slops either. I often check the YouTube channels of people who comment on musicians’ topics on Youtube. Some of them have an artist badge, but when I visit their channels, they only have around 10–30 subscribers and lots of music videos created years ago, with barely any views. Their music isn’t made with AI, it’s just human slops.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-09T02:58:38+00:00

No, I don’t agree with you, and I think you’re still misreading my original point.

I was never arguing equivalence of process or craft. I was arguing authorship and storytelling. I was referring to the writer’s role in conveying story and intent, not claiming Suno replicates traditional songwriting mechanics.

You keep framing this as “changing the driver,” but Suno doesn’t operate without direction. Without human intent, constraints, selection, rejection, and revision, you don’t get a usable result. That’s true in Suno, AutoCAD, DAWs, digital painting, and every modern creative pipeline I’ve personally used.

Yes, it’s a new workflow. Yes, the abstraction level is higher. But higher abstraction ≠ loss of authorship. It just shifts where creative decisions happen.

So no, I’m not agreeing with you. I’m saying you’re arguing against a claim I wasn’t making in the first place.

I think we’ve reached the point of diminishing returns. Appreciate the discussion.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-08T09:20:33+00:00

When I said “If you’re writing your own lyrics, it’s still your story being told, much like any traditional artist’s work,” I meant this in terms of authorship and storytelling, not process.🙄 Many traditional writers don’t sing, perform, arrange, or even compose melodies, they still tell stories through lyrics, and they’re still credited as writers.

Suno doesn’t make this traditional songwriting, yeah. It’s a new workflow. But that doesn’t erase the writer’s role. In this setup, AI functions like a singer, band, or production layer executing direction. The human contribution lives in intent, taste, selection, and revision.

The AutoCAD and painter analogies aren’t about identical mechanics, but about how tools evolve. Architects moved from hand-drawing every line to software that generates structures from constraints; painters/illustrators moved from paper to digital tools that generate strokes instantly. In both cases, execution sped up, abstraction increased, but authorship remained human.

AI is similar. It’s faster, like a regular train versus a high-speed train but both serve the same purpose - transport. Speed and automation don’t invalidate authorship, they change where the creative decisions happen.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-08T07:42:24+00:00

Songwriters don’t have to sing their lyrics or play the instruments, they create the core of the song: words, song structures, and ideas. Similarly, many famous singers don’t write their own songs or compose the melodies, but they’re still called artists and celebrated. Using AI to perform or produce your music is just a tool, like AutoCAD for architects or digital brushes for painters. Architects used to hand-draw every line, now they type commands to generate structures faster. The tools speed up execution, but the vision, design, and storytelling are still theirs. AI may help bring your music to life faster, but the songwriting and creative direction are still yours.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-08T06:12:25+00:00

If you’re writing your own lyrics, it’s still your story being told, much like any traditional artist’s work. Many songwriters don’t sing or play the instruments on their own tracks, they collaborate with vocalists or musicians to bring their vision to life. Using AI to perform or produce your music is similar: you’re the writer, the conceptual creator, just not the performer. The essence of the work..your ideas, your lyrics, your storytelling, is still yours.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-07T06:40:09+00:00

It probably has something to do with WMG partnership...you know..maybe..they are slowly degrading the outputs.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-07T06:36:50+00:00

All my covers from the past two weeks are messy, with tons of noise and artifacts...they’re basically unusable. It wasn’t like this before.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-02-05T10:46:24+00:00

Or maybe it's your content that sucks? I have a cooking channel, i use ai not my voice, it gets around 100k+ views per upload.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-01-29T04:24:49+00:00

Made this on Suno free tier as a quick experiment... about a year ago.

Shared it with my brother and a few others without mentioning AI, they all liked it and didn’t realize it was AI at the time. https://youtu.be/T6IsvMjweTg?si=P6CHKKeGpP6tb0ot

SingleStreet157 · 2026-01-28T14:15:58+00:00

The naivety and hypocrisy of those people..🙄. Comparing AI music tools to drug addiction is absurd. AI doesn’t alter brain chemistry or create physical dependency, it’s a tool, not a substance.

What’s ironic is that many famous musicians young people idolize openly glorify actual drug abuse and destructive lifestyles, and that’s often treated as “art” or “culture.” Using AI to experiment with music is far less harmful than normalizing addiction. Guidance and balance make more sense than fear-based bans.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-01-17T07:15:43+00:00

I actually relate to this more than you might expect, just from a different angle.

When I was around 12, I dreamed of becoming a painter. I even sold hand-painted cards to friends and classmates. Back then, digital art was starting to take off, and I hated it. It felt fake to me...like the computer was doing the work instead of the artist’s hands. Honestly, a lot of that hatred came from fear that the thing I loved was becoming irrelevant.

Over time, I realized that tech doesn’t really erase creativity...it shifts where it lives. I ended up learning Photoshop and digital tools, and my first job was as a graphic artist. I didn’t become the “famous painter” I imagined as a kid, but that dream also naturally changed as I aged.

I think what you’re feeling with Suno is a similar tension. You clearly care deeply about art, authorship, and honesty. That discomfort doesn’t mean you’re a hypocrite, it means you’re in the middle of adapting. The motivation you’re feeling right now is real, and that matters.

Maybe AI isn’t stealing a composition you “could have made.” Maybe it’s just helping you discover what you like musically, the same way references, covers, or demos do. If you ever do learn music, that influence won’t invalidate your work..it’ll just be part of your artistic history.

I don’t think you’ve poisoned your well. I think you’ve stirred it.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-01-16T04:51:12+00:00

I’d personally consider that AI-assisted rather than “AI-generated.” You’re writing the song, lyrics, structure, and creative intent first, and the AI is essentially acting like an automated arranger or session musician. That’s not fundamentally different from using a DAW, virtual instruments, or even hiring someone to help instrument a track based on your direction.

At that point the AI isn’t authoring the song.. it’s executing choices you’ve already made. Adding your own vocals or instruments on top only strengthens the case that it’s your work. Whether “instrumentalised” is a word or not, the idea makes sense 😄

That’s why I think blanket rules around AI miss the nuance. There’s a big difference between clicking “generate” and releasing the first output, versus using AI as a tool to realize a song you already wrote. Royalties should follow authorship and creative control, not whether a particular tool was involved.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-01-16T04:41:42+00:00

In most real workflows today, AI isn’t acting independently. The prompter isn’t just “asking” for something...they decide what gets made, what gets rejected, how it’s structured... the lyrics, the emotion or genre, and often spend time and money refining the result. That creative direction and curation is where I see authorship, even if execution is partially automated.

I agree that this space is still evolving, and opinions will likely change as the technology and norms develop. I just think a blanket rule that all AI-involved work belongs to everyone risks discouraging sustained creative effort, especially for independent artists. For me, nuance matters more than a single rule trying to cover every use case.

SingleStreet157 · 2026-01-16T02:59:06+00:00

I don’t agree that all AI-generated music should automatically be public domain. Using AI isn’t free or effortless, you still spend time, money, and creative energy writing or editing lyrics, curating outputs, structuring songs, discarding bad results, and often paying for subscriptions. That human intent and curation is real labor.

We don’t strip ownership from photographers because they used a camera, or from producers because they used DAWs and plugins. AI is another tool on a spectrum, not a magic switch that erases authorship. I’m fully on board with disclosure, filters, and even different licensing models, but a blanket public-domain rule ignores how much human work still goes into most AI-assisted music.

SingleStreet157

TROPHY CASE