Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

human-made.work

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 104 posts

Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

#21

Post by MattRix »

steno132 wrote: post #14
happytoexplain wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horrible ? You could have argued that celebrating both things is fine. But you didn't. The implication is simply the opposite: That I should be ashamed if I enjoy or am proud to have made something by hand. Technology is not a universal good. That's a simplistic idea. We have taken thousands of years to develop all sorts of horrible shit with more downsides than upsides - things that only exist because they are inevi…

Take a example. You could be a hunter gatherer, you could grow all your own crops from scratch, you could forsake all modern medicine and rely on superstition - would you be considered a wise person? You figured out things a lot of people didn't, you took the harder road - but most people would say this approach is just dumb. What's wise isn't forsaking technology, it's using technology to improve things, and develop…

Do you think it would be a good thing if all music (for example) was made with AI and not by humans? What a lot of people in tech right now don’t seem to get is that art is about how it transforms the artist, not just the final product.

Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

#22

Post by happytoexplain »

jrflo wrote: post #5
janaagaard wrote: post #3

What are the rules? Is it okay to use autocomplete? Are spell checkers accepted? What if I used an AI chatbot to figure out something instead of a traditional search engine?

Is it ok if I used a compiler and didn't write the assembly code by hand?

It's hard to tell if you're mocking the parent's fallacy or contributing to it.

Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

#23

Post by happytoexplain »

steno132 wrote: post #14
happytoexplain wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horrible ? You could have argued that celebrating both things is fine. But you didn't. The implication is simply the opposite: That I should be ashamed if I enjoy or am proud to have made something by hand. Technology is not a universal good. That's a simplistic idea. We have taken thousands of years to develop all sorts of horrible shit with more downsides than upsides - things that only exist because they are inevi…

Take a example. You could be a hunter gatherer, you could grow all your own crops from scratch, you could forsake all modern medicine and rely on superstition - would you be considered a wise person? You figured out things a lot of people didn't, you took the harder road - but most people would say this approach is just dumb. What's wise isn't forsaking technology, it's using technology to improve things, and develop…

That's not an example, it's an analogy. I don't see the value in shifting the conversation to identifying all the differences in an (extremely removed) analogy. It's rhetorically low-quality.

Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

#24

Post by recursive »

skyberrys wrote: post #8

From the name I was expecting to be humans doing things to force work. Like my child pouring milk on the table. Now I get to do work cleaning. It's human-made work. It's pretty easy to make work for others.

"Work" as in artwork or "Look on my works ye Mighty, and despair!"

Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

#25

Post by F3nd0 »

steno132 wrote: post #6

[flagged]

> There's absolutely nothing wrong with using AI and it's something we should be celebrating.

In many cases, there are clear disadvantages to using AI, be it the effect on human psyche, the considerable resource consumption, the style of the output, or the fact that the resulting work was not authored by a person, which is a very subjective preference, but one that many people have nevertheless.

I agree that AI is a great technological achievement, but it’s not as if great technological achievements don’t come with any downsides. Celebrating them is reasonable, but also situational.

Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

#27

Post by yallpendantools »

Induane wrote: post #4

I have began to use AI to flesh out unittests and honestly am kind of digging that part. All the actual code is still me though.

This was my earliest use-case for LLMs and it remains to this day as the most compelling value proposition of all the fancy new LLMs.

I have always tried to abide by DRY in my programming career with the huge exception of writing unit tests. I made the mistake, early in my career when Test-Driven Development was all the rage, of making unit tests reflect the inheritance structure of the actual code. It just made sense. Needless to say, it quickly descended into the most bizarre manifestation of inheritance hell as tests randomly failed with no correlation to the changes done in the core code.

Hence, I resolved to make unit tests the huge exception to DRY. The more straightforward your tests are, the better. Endeavor that each test method up to a test class should read understandably on its own.

This, of course, made tests quite a mechanical chore to write. Which makes it the perfect use case for these large, verbose, and humorless daemons. Bonus that they are also very good at vibing out the set-up needed for a test so I can focus on specifying the test cases I want rather than setting up mock after stub after fake.

The output is also very easy to review and verify. I see no moral quandary in this kind of usage.

Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

#28

Post by recursive »

vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #18
pton_xd wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's absolutely nothing wrong with using AI and it's something we should be celebrating. Ok, but there's also nothing wrong with celebrating not using AI.

There is nothing wrong with walking or riding horses to get to where you need to go but I wouldn't celebrate that. It's a nice hobby bit not efficient. The same will probably happen to most of "human made code". It's fun but doesn't make much sense economically.

We must only celebrate that which is economically efficient.

Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made

#29

Post by mrkeen »

kbrkbr wrote: post #17
happytoexplain wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is dishonest (and very common). You may certainly argue that genAI content should count as human-made, but it's pointless to just gesture at pre-genAI tools like autocomplete and insist that other people do the work of comparing/contrasting. It's OK to use the term "human made" to mean "not the output of genAI". There's no "gotcha" to be scored here.

What is dishonest about asking for clarification of submission criteria that are utterly unclear? > Help us to signify and share projects done by humans (not AI). Here is nothing about GenAI specifically. Who else could be asked if not the ones that set up this collection?

I dunno what version of the site you saw, but it probably hasn't changed in the last 17 minutes since your post.

  There's only one rule: generative AI cannot be used in the creation of the project.
Post reply on HN