Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

news.ycombinator.com

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#41

Who is "we", Kimosabe? Personally, I have no time for gen-AI in pretty much any context, at least given the current landscape. And plenty of people seem to accept, if not love, gen-AI art. I don't get it, but it's true. > While browsing YouTube, an AI-generated video appeared and I reflexively told my wife, “That’s AI—skip it.” My reflex whenever I encounter gen-AI output in any form: text, code, image, music, video,…

> And plenty of people seem to accept, if not love, gen-AI art. I don't get it, but it's true. I get a kick out of generating photos with family and friends in different styles like Play-Doh, Simpsons, Ghibli, etc. All of them like it, too. Maybe that's what people like, a very relatable use of the technology.

Yeah but the fun won’t last, you’ll get bored with this look and the idea of looks when all the space around you will be innundated with it. But no harm in having fun though…

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#43
> Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

That's not the generalization that I would make of HN sentiment.

But one generalization I'll assert is that there seems to be a very strong undercurrent of self-interest, often to the point of cheating. It's not universal, but it might be over 50%. The field has been selecting for, and refining for, people who seek big paychecks, and train for the BS rituals (e.g., FAANG interviews, resume-driven-development, metrics, Agile reactive theatre, growth scam startups).

How are all those people going to think about tools that might give them an edge in their operating mode. Would they be thinking about quality, maintainability, security, team, company goals, or ethics.

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#44
I feel the sentiment on HN for both is very positive. But yes, I am negative personally on generative AI. It really comes down to the 3C's and how current LLM training blatantly stomps on them. Yet another piece of business making billions relying on artists without compensating and people wonder why the art community becomes so cynical.

I'm indifferent on co-piliot stuff. For my domain it isn't as useful as using snippets, but code tends to be easier to follow the 3c's on than art. Most coede people don't want copied already is obfruscated or simply not publicly readable.

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#45

I'm not sure we can be certain everyone has that view. I get the impression many of the people who vilify art generators are also against coding copilots. > I reflexively told my wife, “That’s AI—skip it.” > Yet I’m using AI-created illustrations for my graphic novel Aren't you worried people will skip your graphic novel?

If I see AI art in a graphic novel, I'll stop reading and downvote it.

It's also weird to me, like...

I've used AI art a lot for tabletop RPGs. The level of actual creative control isn't great, even for what should be an easy case of one character in profile against a blank background. Even if you know how to use it well you're wrestling the systems involved to try and produce consistent output ot anything unusual. And that's fine for Orc #3 or Elf Lord Soandso, which are only going to be featured for fifteen minutes at a time and in contexts where you can crop out bad details or use low-effort color grading to get a unified tone.

But for a graphic novel? What? I can't imagine giving up that level of creative control, even as someone who sucks at actual drawing. You'll never be able to get the kind of framing, poses, and structuring you want, doubly so the second you want to include anything remotely original. It's about the absolute worst case for actually using these generation tools.

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#46
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the two-dozen-or-so people I know closely hate AI art - hate . Not as a tool, e.g. for making images to go with your DnD campaign or whatever - that's great - but rather as replacements for human art. E.g. as blog post images, movie posters, images uploaded to art hubs, etc. They also mostly hate the way it usually looks.

Wouldn't a human normally make the D&D characters though? Also, do they hate all AI art, or just art where they can tell because it looks like AI art?

The "make" here is referring to representative art (for use with battle map standees if nothing else), where the previous common method is "grab a loosely representative image from a web search".

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#47
I paint as a hobby. I think a lot of people put less value on digital art in general. It's almost like too perfect doesn't hit it right for most people. I was in a local gallery last week and saw one image from afar thinking "that's very detailed to be so cheap" then get close enough to see it's printed digital art and lose interest. The next painting over was a waterfall and you could see the brush strokes, yet I found it infinitely more interesting.

However, AI image generation is immensely helpful when I want to do a painting. Before I would find photos I liked and stitch them together, or try to imagine things. Now I can get an image much closer to reference.

With code, my feeling is that we have to write way too much of it right now to express what we want. I can write a small bit of text to the LLM and it will fill out 75%+ of the code over multiple files, which I then just need to shape. So much is structure that needs repeating in variations. I don't have an answer but it seems like there's something else missing from our tools and LLMs are providing a bad imitation of what it should be.

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#48
The interesting thing about art is mostly not its physical existence. The interesting thing about art is that another human being made it to try to express something, in words or colors or film or whatever medium. It's a person trying to show you their interiority, taking something fundamentally unknowable—another living mind—and making it legible to other people. Even when it's art for hire like animation in a commercial, at the end of the day there's some human or humans who put some work in there. LLM-generated art just doesn't have that. There's no interiority to be exposed.

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#49
Who is this “we” in your postulation? If you’re using AI for your “graphic novel” I object to thinking yourself one of the creative class. To put it another way, if AI was a human being and a slave to you, where you simply prompted it and appropriated its output, would you reasonably be considered a “creator” of that work? I assert you would not.

The entire framing of this question, as posed, is transparently self-serving as a justification to seek validation for a process which, fundamentally, contradicts the purpose and definitions of art.

Code is a functional set of orders to a machine, nothing more. Nobody is buying paperbacks of source code to read on an airplane, correct? It’s refreshing to have this opportunity to confront these absolutely infuriating equivocations which have momentum in the present day.

There’s a reason the term “AI slop” is floating around with such frequency. I am an artist and a musician and a writer. You are not a part of our “we” buddy. Sorry not sorry.

Re: Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

#50

I'm not sure we can be certain everyone has that view. I get the impression many of the people who vilify art generators are also against coding copilots. > I reflexively told my wife, “That’s AI—skip it.” > Yet I’m using AI-created illustrations for my graphic novel Aren't you worried people will skip your graphic novel?

If I see AI art in a graphic novel, I'll stop reading and downvote it.

For webnovels I've found it useful as someone who has borderline aphantasia. But in this case, the webnovels would normally have no graphics whatsoever in their chapters aside from the webnovel's cover art (which is usually done by an actual graphic designer).

It's very obvious that they're AI generated, and the authors are typically upfront about it. I still feel a bit of an ick when I see them, and Patreon discussions for the creators I follow also have similar sentiments. Not sure if it's truly a tolerable use-case for AI, but thought I'd throw it out there.

Post reply on HN