Live data from Hacker News

I don't want anything your AI generates

coryd.dev

171–180 of 345 posts

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#171
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fine, I’ll bite I guess. AI generated content will never beat a Studio Ghibli production. This must be judged by actual fans, not those who want AI to win. There’s no way AI is deriving content like that studio can make. Not in months (lol), not in 10 years. The point of all content isn’t shitting something out for a quick buck, which sure, AI will excel at. Studio Ghibli is clearly taking care to create unique works…

What's your take on this? Not an expert but I think some of these are (vaguely?) based on Studio Ghibli aesthetics: https://old.reddit.com/r/aiArt/comments/17zmx1n/unreleased_1...

They’re all static images, not very comparable to a complete production. I admit they look good, but animation is another thing completely. And music. And story.

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Please don't position it so that if I want to use AI I have to defend myself from accusations of exploiting labor and the environment. Why should you be free of accountability for the effects of your actions?

Because the effects of my actions in this case have yet to be demonstrated, let alone shown to cause harm. The author claims there is expoititive harm to labor, the environment, and maybe others. That is not at all obvious or provably true yet. As I said, I'm open to the discussion, but I can't defend myself in good faith when people claim some slam dunk moral certitude. Again, don't use generative AI if it makes you…

The flip side of that coin is brazen "ingenuity" with complete disregard for the consequences is just as bad as blindly declaring all AI is bad.

We need people like the person writing this article so the starry eyed people who are too excited about AI and pushing it into everything are kept in check.

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes.

That's a bold claim. In order for that to be true there would have to be some fundamental limitation preventing AI from ever thinking on the level of a human.

It’s a bold claim the other way too, that we can create something human from binary logic.

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#174

Anytime someone sends me something generated by ChatGPT, I think about how AI expert Hilary Mason puts it: "By design, ChatGPT aspires to be the most mediocre web content you can imagine." https://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2023/03/chatgpt-explained-hilary-m...

This resonates with my experience using Copilot. It generates lowest-common-denominator code, and displays a stunning unawareness of language and library features. Some understandable due to training cutoff (but still very frustrating), but it also refused to use Pillow functions that seem to have been around for a decade, instead crufting together some shitty pipeline by hand.

> it also refused to use Pillow functions that seem to have been around for a decade, instead crufting together some shitty pipeline by hand.

Definitely passes the Turing test.

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#175

I think the funny result of our ML work is that we essentially bringing the value of being online down and will eventually force people to interact IRL as costs of verifying these generations becomes too high. That is we are going back to pre-Internet era interactions. I agree with the author, but I also don't see lower usage of all this already meaningless human-produced content as inherently bad. The hope is dim, b…

You might like https://www.fortressofdoors.com/ai-markets-for-lemons-and-th...

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#176

I think the funny result of our ML work is that we essentially bringing the value of being online down and will eventually force people to interact IRL as costs of verifying these generations becomes too high. That is we are going back to pre-Internet era interactions. I agree with the author, but I also don't see lower usage of all this already meaningless human-produced content as inherently bad. The hope is dim, b…

I think you're underestimating the benefits of having social community online, I've found and made extremely close friends and even partners online and they have been utterly life-changing for me. I'm making/have made (I'm different cases) herculean efforts to be able to be with them in person permanently because obviously in person interaction is better, but being able to discover people that are so good for me and…

I've been thinking about this a lot the last two years as someone who also grew up with social community online. It was life-changing for me too, but sometimes I catch myself wishing I could have had these experiences offline instead.

I read this a few months ago and I still think about it all the time. Curious about your thoughts. https://maya.land/monologues/2023/08/12/social-media-chalk-m...

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#177

My boss “writes” policies etc using ChatGPT. They’re generic, overly wordy and say nothing of original thought. I don’t read them and don’t care. When he sends me a link to them in MS Teams I always click the first auto suggested response Teams like “Looks great!” Machine v machine.

His mistake was not instructing it to be terse. AI output doesn't have to be more annoying and less dense than human output.

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#178

I'm not a fan of this hyper aggressive line-in-the-sand argumentation about AI that pushes it all precariously close to culture war shenanigans. If you don't like a new technology that is perfectly cool and your right to an opinion. Please don't position it so that if I want to use AI I have to defend myself from accusations of exploiting labor and the environment. That is NOT at all clear, settled, or even correct m…

> Please don't position it so that if I want to use AI I have to defend myself from accusations of exploiting labor and the environment. You, personally, likely are not (apart from electricity use but that's iffy.) But the technology you want to use could not exist, and cannot continue to be improved, without those two things. That's not unclear in the slightest, that's just fact. > I'm open to that conversation and…

That's not a steelman. At the very best:

- All content was viewed and learned from, which is ethical (even a good) use of all content that has ever been released content to the public.

- Gave jobs to 3rd world laborers.

- Benefited us, made some of us everymen more productive and able to build and create in ways that we weren't able to before.

I suspect you don't agree with all the above, but that's more like what a steelman argument should be.

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#179

I'm not a fan of this hyper aggressive line-in-the-sand argumentation about AI that pushes it all precariously close to culture war shenanigans. If you don't like a new technology that is perfectly cool and your right to an opinion. Please don't position it so that if I want to use AI I have to defend myself from accusations of exploiting labor and the environment. That is NOT at all clear, settled, or even correct m…

The issue is that without loud declaration like this money men will just soldier on with implementing shittier future. It's always do something first and then ask for forgiveness. But at the point you ask for it it's too late and too many eggs were broken. And somehow you're richer at the end of it all and thus, protected from any consequences. While everyone else is, forgive my French, fucked. Has Facebook been a ne…

Why would YouTube or Netflix be a net negative?

Re: I don't want anything your AI generates

#180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that without loud declaration like this money men will just soldier on with implementing shittier future. It's always do something first and then ask for forgiveness. But at the point you ask for it it's too late and too many eggs were broken. And somehow you're richer at the end of it all and thus, protected from any consequences. While everyone else is, forgive my French, fucked. Has Facebook been a ne…

Why would YouTube or Netflix be a net negative?

I said YouTube isn't a net negative. Even then you have to think globally, what about children who grew up consuming AI generated abomination animations made with 0 oversight of even its greedy creators?

Netflix was the cause for current slate of tax writeoff cancellations (no Netflix no overinvestment by Warner etc and no clumsy Zaslav cleanup), terrible shows being greenlit, homogeneity of camerawork, casting, identity-politics pandering that nobody asked for, oversaturation of the market with streaming services that is almost as bad as cable etc. It's basically a cancer overgrowth, good short-term and terrible long-term. Binge-tv model is also not a good thing, in terms of how much time it takes up, how little it brings in terms of pleasure and validates our growing impatience. I could go on and on. Does anyone even remember Mank or The Killer? Imagine Poor Things being Netflix-only release. Nobody would even say a single peep about it outside of niche film twitter accounts.

Generally speaking, if you've read "Seeing Like a State", then you can apply the same logic to companies and the entire industries, or really any aspirations of "man". We crave control and fear uncertainty, so we make environments far more deterministic, which brings more short-term profit but ruins the environment (be it nature or film itself). Look at Disney, Iger created the superhero movie boom (by making it super deterministic and boring: every movie is part of a giant puzzle so that each piece brings money) but in the process killed Star vehicles, killed experimentation (by directors, actors), and now Scorsese and Coppola need to throw around their weight to reverse the course. Sure, A24 exists, but before this all movies were A24 movies essentially. Now a major star being in a horror movie is an "Event". (Who is even a star anymore? DiCaprio, Cruise? These people were around since 80s. You think Chris Evans will have the same longevity?) Yeah, there were similar periods of dominance (80s action movies) but they weren't so precisely fine-tuned and featured greater directorial freedom and less emphasis on being non-offensive.

I guarantee you none of you will quote Avengers (Ultron onwards) in next 20 years. People still quote Terminator 2 or Predator or Lethal Weapon, despite them also being brainless flicks (some not so brainless actually). Look at Dr Strange 2, they forced Raimi to stop being Raimi basically (the first movie has some good moments), and made him fall in line with the "agenda", because the plan™ is too important to compromise on. In reality the plan™ is the money perputuum mobile lol. Sure, these people were always greedy, but stochasticity of the system allowed for good stuff to pass through their Eyes of Sauron lmao.

Tbh I don't even know why I'm responding a "throwaway" account.

Post reply on HN