[flagged]
You're absolutely right!
Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
51–60 of 104 posts
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#52I like this project and the negative responses here are reinforcing me in this decision.
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#53I like this project and the negative responses here are reinforcing me in this decision.
When slop-jockeys get so triggered they pretend they can't even comprehend the premise and start to hyperfixate on semantics and pedantism you know it's a good idea.
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#54If the only interesting thing about a work is it's provenance is that work actually valuable?
actually in all honesty human works are predominantly crap, and a bit passé. If I'm going to visit a site whose whole shtick is provenance I'd rather see some really, objectively good, ai stuff. that would be way more interesting.
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#55Earlier 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.
Ok, what about a more direct take. Hello games made a game called No Man's Sky which has VERY heavy use of procedural generation. Same as Minecraft. If someone were to make the same games using genAi, would it be less impressive, even if the output was 'better'?
Yes, of course.
But even if the answer was no, I don't see the relationship to what I said. I never commented on "impressiveness".
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#56What 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?
None of these amount to AI making something. Before AI, it’s been humans who put the words on the paper, who put the strokes on the canvas, who put the notes on the sheet. Spell-checking and auto-completion have existed before AI and do not fundamentally change the process. Since this project singles out AI (likely generative AI using machine learning), it seems evident to me that it rules out any involvement which d…
The question remains. Where do you draw the line? What are the rules?
The site only states "There's only one rule: generative AI cannot be used in the creation of the project.", without defining any further rules, nor does it clarify the exact definition of "creation of the project".
Like, what if you included a library in your project that was vibe-coded (but your main code wasn't), would your project be considered as "human-made"?
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of these amount to AI making something. Before AI, it’s been humans who put the words on the paper, who put the strokes on the canvas, who put the notes on the sheet. Spell-checking and auto-completion have existed before AI and do not fundamentally change the process. Since this project singles out AI (likely generative AI using machine learning), it seems evident to me that it rules out any involvement which d…
The question remains. Where do you draw the line? What are the rules? The site only states " There's only one rule: generative AI cannot be used in the creation of the project. ", without defining any further rules, nor does it clarify the exact definition of "creation of the project". Like, what if you included a library in your project that was vibe-coded (but your main code wasn't), would your project be considere…
> The question remains. Where do you draw the line? What are the rules?
These questions absolutely remain, but their scope is not nearly as wide as some people here make it out to be. Of course, narrowing it down further might be nice.
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#58I find it interesting how the techies are suddenly losing their minds over technology. We have killed a ton of other people’s jobs over the last few decades and made excellent money doing so. Now it seems it’s our turn
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#59I like this project and the negative responses here are reinforcing me in this decision.
When slop-jockeys get so triggered they pretend they can't even comprehend the premise and start to hyperfixate on semantics and pedantism you know it's a good idea.
the work featured is extremely mediocre and the "human made" label feels forced
Re: Let's celebrate work that is 100% human-made
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of these amount to AI making something. Before AI, it’s been humans who put the words on the paper, who put the strokes on the canvas, who put the notes on the sheet. Spell-checking and auto-completion have existed before AI and do not fundamentally change the process. Since this project singles out AI (likely generative AI using machine learning), it seems evident to me that it rules out any involvement which d…
The question remains. Where do you draw the line? What are the rules? The site only states " There's only one rule: generative AI cannot be used in the creation of the project. ", without defining any further rules, nor does it clarify the exact definition of "creation of the project". Like, what if you included a library in your project that was vibe-coded (but your main code wasn't), would your project be considere…
> Like, what if you included a library in your project that was vibe-coded (but your main code wasn't), would your project be considered as "human-made"?
Of course not.