Live data from Hacker News

Knitting bullshit

katedaviesdesigns.com

11–20 of 221 posts

Re: Knitting bullshit

#12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, well good thing that LLMs are good at summarizing articles, unlike generating believable knitting images.

I was a couple of images in before I sussed it. Bullshit images, but pleasing enough to look at. Without the images, it would have either been a big wall of text, which would have put me off reading, though I did give up about 25% of the way through after sussing the images and thus the incoherence in the argument. The images bring something to the article. They were cheap/quick to generate. The increase the potentia…

The AI images were deliberate and part of the narrative. Ie, you can generate slop with zero effort.

from TFA: "All of the images in this post were generated by an ai in response to the simple two-word prompt “lovely knitting”

Edit: ps: Kate Davies is an actual creator who has been creating knitting patterns for years.

Re: Knitting bullshit

#13
I wonder if (or, more accurately hope that) this kind of slop will eventually die out as people realise how little care is put into it. I am more and more convinced that if the devil existed he'd take care of the bigger stuff, but have an army of little devils that encourage people to do things like make unsupervised automated podcasts about knitting, relentlessly chipping away at the messy joys of living.

Re: Knitting bullshit

#14
post #10

TL;DR: there are brainrot farms with help from AI. But I saw this one coming three or four years ago. Actually, I've been listening to AI-generated brainrot music. I prefer it to some human-generated brainrot music (there's "I Hate Boys" from Christina Aguilera. Sorry if you are a fan). Brainrot serves a specific social purpose: relieving stress, incoherently winning elections. It's a kind of drug that dulls the dang…

Are you serious when you connect anti-AI sentiment to anti-science sentiment?

To me, they are opposite sentiments, and my experience discussing AI with others supports this. The most pro-AI people I meet are very far removed from science, and my research colleagues are definitely more critical of AI than not.

Re: Knitting bullshit

#15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, well good thing that LLMs are good at summarizing articles, unlike generating believable knitting images.

I was a couple of images in before I sussed it. Bullshit images, but pleasing enough to look at. Without the images, it would have either been a big wall of text, which would have put me off reading, though I did give up about 25% of the way through after sussing the images and thus the incoherence in the argument. The images bring something to the article. They were cheap/quick to generate. The increase the potentia…

Reading that made me feel like you wanted to be contrarian from the get-go and dismiss the article with the least effort possible. The whole point of the images is that they're low-effort AI slop, it's part of what she's trying to point to when someone is generating unsupervised automated podcasts about knitting.

Re: Knitting bullshit

#16
I remember this kind of slop from times well before the LLM explosion.

I'm specifically thinking of a print magazine that was designed to make you feel like you are a smart reader of science articles, without any useful information about the actual science or technology.

Re: Knitting bullshit

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, well good thing that LLMs are good at summarizing articles, unlike generating believable knitting images.

I was a couple of images in before I sussed it. Bullshit images, but pleasing enough to look at. Without the images, it would have either been a big wall of text, which would have put me off reading, though I did give up about 25% of the way through after sussing the images and thus the incoherence in the argument. The images bring something to the article. They were cheap/quick to generate. The increase the potentia…

So you're saying you can spot AI generated bullshit, but not spot a deliberate and hilarious contrivance that the author uses to reinforce their point?

Re: Knitting bullshit

#18
post #10

TL;DR: there are brainrot farms with help from AI. But I saw this one coming three or four years ago. Actually, I've been listening to AI-generated brainrot music. I prefer it to some human-generated brainrot music (there's "I Hate Boys" from Christina Aguilera. Sorry if you are a fan). Brainrot serves a specific social purpose: relieving stress, incoherently winning elections. It's a kind of drug that dulls the dang…

ummmm, WOW!, hey that clicks your brainrot/drug description is good. making a choice for zero human content and therfore interaction.

the full suite of options would include perfectly artificial scents. personaly, I am way over in the analog/organic direction, but I get the need to disconect from the "whatever this is™" that passes for a society. the question remains for AI scaling to meet the demands and desires society has always placed on indivuals

the audible exasperated noise comming from the person in line with me, seeing me pull out cash, thereby breaking there own perfect little automated world, mearly by bieng subjected to witnessing such a primitive ritual, not behind me I might add, the person leaving in front of me, is the prime example of someone who will violently reject AI and the rest when it inevitably fails to "fix" everything

Re: Knitting bullshit

#19
Interestingly, Inception AI seem to have pivoted from content slop for "gardening, [...] knitting, cooking" - or "things we can afford to be wrong" - to "AI Immigration Drafting Software for Law Firms": https://www.inceptionai.co/

I'm somewhat curious how that'll work out. Hint: I'm not.

EDIT: My bad, wrong company, it's "Inception Point AI": https://www.inceptionpoint.ai/

Re: Knitting bullshit

#20
post #11

Am I to believe that those 700K+ downloads are organic traffic? Who's listening to all this stuff?

No, but to misinform people you have two main strategies: limiting through tailored scarcity and dilute in extra-generic overabundance. Don’t get it wrong: both can be combined and even can sometime overlap.

It doesn’t matter if no one is listening. Equally saturating all channels, metrics and indicator is enough to create hindrance so preventing relevant information to spread in meaningful time.

Attention is all you need, so distraction is all that will be given.

Post reply on HN