AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

Post by sbochins » Tue, Aug 04, 2026, 3:59 PM UTC

atomicfiredoll wrote: post #236

sbochins wrote: post #53

I don’t have a problem with ai generated media in blogs at all. Nobody is going to take the time to hand draw a piece of art for a blog that takes them less than an hour to write. Pictures speak a thousand words and serve as a great intro to a blog post. Embrace the future.

> Pictures speak a thousand words and serve as a great intro to a blog post. If pictures are so important, why would "nobody... take the time to hand draw a piece of art" or find a one of the many free stock photos? When I was actively blogging, I would doodle quick images to include all the time for this precise reason.

Post by card_zero » Tue, Aug 04, 2026, 4:03 PM UTC

XenophileJKO wrote: post #338

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to articulate this stuff, and especially hard to explain it to the AI infatuated among us because they don't really want to understand why people dislike the tooling they're obsessed with. AI is good at many things, digesting vast quantities of information, and code being most of them. Everything else to me looks/sounds like shit. AI music sounds dull and overproduced in a way that a lot of middling pop mus…

The biggest mistake is thinking that your aesthetics are "correct". You make it a personal slight when you espouse, that your aesthetic preferences are universal and then farther malign people with different preferences by saying that they are not aesthecticly minded.

Post by byronturncoat » Tue, Aug 04, 2026, 4:11 PM UTC

Ariarule wrote: post #315

byronturncoat wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is artistry in assembling other art into a single cohesive piece. A film is a collection of the work of artists and performers. Combining AI imagery and AI text together does not make art, because none of the constituent parts are art. A few prompts do not make art.

Is a painting not art because individual pigments aren't art?

Post by ModernMech » Tue, Aug 04, 2026, 4:12 PM UTC

sunrunner wrote: post #118

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you didn't create anything if you used Photoshop... You didn't create anything if you used synth and autotune... You didn't do any scientific research if you used a calculator. You didn't do anything if you just piped together two programs. I've heard it all before. Gate keepers wanna keep the gate as long as they can.

You probably put a fair amount more effort and intention in than from just writing a text prompt, I'd wager. All of those examples would require you to at least have some kind of idea about your intended output.

Post by andai » Tue, Aug 04, 2026, 4:13 PM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: post #8

To me there are different motivations to include imagery and some of them are just fine with AI generation. If the imagery actually goes to the substance of helping to illustrate or explain the actual content then it seems very superficial to reject it based on how it was generated. In fact it is kind of stupid to insist someone slavishly draw something by hand that could have been done an easier way. The problem com…