Live data from Hacker News

Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

whatever.scalzi.com

41–50 of 73 posts

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#41
post #27
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the argument you're looking for, but I've been playing drums for over ten years now because of Rock Band. Even used the sticks that came with it on my first e-kit. The game didn't teach me how to drum, but it taught me that I had a much deeper interest in playing drums than I'd ever imagined. That led into years and years of practice and I've actually become pretty good.

And that scenario is covered in the post, in the seventh paragraph. Nowhere in it is Scalzi saying Guitar Hero can’t give you an interest to pick up the Guitar, quite the opposite . The point being made is that when you do pick up the Guitar, you’re starting to learn from scratch, your years of playing Guitar Hero don’t really give you a head-start.

The paragraph in-question:

  Sure, it’s all gamified and fun and even addictive, but at the end of the day no outside, transferable skill accrues to the player. To do that, you have to set the controller down, pick up an actual guitar, and start another, entirely different journey. And perhaps some Guitar Hero player did or will, which is awesome. It means at some point they were not satisfied with pretending to play the guitar, following someone else’s rules and set-up. They still started, effectively, at zero. There was a whole new skill tree to be learned that had very little to do with the game, outside of the shape of the controller. 
I get the point, but I think it's not great. A lot of what's said here can also be said about cover bands or learning to play other peoples' music.

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#42
post #12
post #9

This seems disingenuous. I can ask a generative AI "explain this ternary operator to me" or "walk me through why this causes a race condition" I cannot ask the video game why my real guitar is out of tune, or diagnose why I'm holding the fret wrong.

That implies that you did more than prompt the AI and actually learned whatever activity it is you are asking the AI about, because otherwise you wouldn't know to ask those questions. A person making music solely with AI won't ask about tuning their guitar because they don't have one and don't intend to use one.

One could also make hotdogs and eat them without developing any skill as a chef, but it's unlikely there would be thousands of blog posts complaining about the downsides of microwaved hotdogs every week.

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#43
post #17

Scalzi has developed an almost religious sort of dogmatic hatred of AI. He seems to acknowledge none of the benefits, even those that are obvious. Likely because he feels it's harmful to the way he earns his living. He is rapidly coming to define himself through opposition, rather than promotion. Which is a dangerous and fruitless game. Throughout human history there has never been a still useful technology that we a…

> Likely because he feels it's harmful to the way he earns his living. Absurd. Scalzi fans are not going to stop reading his works because LLMs exist. If anything, established authors are the ones with the least to fear. This talking point that when people dislike something it’s because it affects their personal finances is getting really tired. Not everyone is a greedy selfish prick who only thinks of themselves, pe…

> Apparently the people who called LLMs parrots got it wrong, they instead turn people into them, mindlessly repeating whatever the labs want them to.

Being rude about it doesn't make you right about it.

It sounds like people are repeating themselves because they have to keep repeating the obvious in every one of these threads:

The tools are useful, people are going to use them. Cope.

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#44
post #38

Scalzi has developed an almost religious sort of dogmatic hatred of AI. He seems to acknowledge none of the benefits, even those that are obvious. Likely because he feels it's harmful to the way he earns his living. He is rapidly coming to define himself through opposition, rather than promotion. Which is a dangerous and fruitless game. Throughout human history there has never been a still useful technology that we a…

Climate Change has accelerated rapidly. We're expecting 3 degrees of warming by 2050 now, 5 degrees by 2100. Betting on the singularity to save us is culty wankery.

I doubt that any reasonable person is actually counting on that.

It's a new, and potentially very lucrative, technology. Given time the cost will go down, not up. The way that will happen is increased efficiency.

Do I know HOW that will happen? No, but I know that it will. It always has, and there are huge motivations for making it happen.

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#45
post #27
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the argument you're looking for, but I've been playing drums for over ten years now because of Rock Band. Even used the sticks that came with it on my first e-kit. The game didn't teach me how to drum, but it taught me that I had a much deeper interest in playing drums than I'd ever imagined. That led into years and years of practice and I've actually become pretty good.

And that scenario is covered in the post, in the seventh paragraph. Nowhere in it is Scalzi saying Guitar Hero can’t give you an interest to pick up the Guitar, quite the opposite . The point being made is that when you do pick up the Guitar, you’re starting to learn from scratch, your years of playing Guitar Hero don’t really give you a head-start.

You've had years of listening to music and practicing a very rudimentary form of sight reading.

I'm not aware of any studies proving or disproving that this gives beginners a head start, but it would be an interesting thing to investigate.

A categorical "Nice try, but you've just been wasting your time" seems overconfident.

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#46
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Likely because he feels it's harmful to the way he earns his living. Absurd. Scalzi fans are not going to stop reading his works because LLMs exist. If anything, established authors are the ones with the least to fear. This talking point that when people dislike something it’s because it affects their personal finances is getting really tired. Not everyone is a greedy selfish prick who only thinks of themselves, pe…

Nobody even started to seriously write books using AI. But at one point there will be AI books on "most read" lists. And a more than one of those will have readership higher than anything by John Scalzi. And he's not bad, I liked what I read of his.

Plenty of people have been using AI to write books for a couple of years now.

The successful ones already knew how to write books - which directly contradicts the standard line about "It's just people who couldn't do it without AI."

That's just objectively wrong.

There have been some successful spammers who flood Amazon with tens/hundreds/thousands of titles, but that's more of an exercise in technology and marketing than writing.

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#47

"But, like Guitar Hero, no outside creative skill has been acquired or developed." Spoken like someone who never actually played the games. GH developed my interest in music as a kid, and Rock Band actually taught me how to drum in real life. It also garnered my interest in picking up and learning real guitar. Those who forget that Rock Band not only a) existed and b) did everything GH did but a thousand times better…

The point being made isn't that it cannot inspire someone to then go on to learn but that mastery of the game alone does not convey creative skill. Of course someone can be inspired to go out and learn the skill being modeled but use of the model doesn't teach the skill even if it might make someone really excited to go learn.

Is anyone actually arguing that it conveys creative skill though?

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#48
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Likely because he feels it's harmful to the way he earns his living. Absurd. Scalzi fans are not going to stop reading his works because LLMs exist. If anything, established authors are the ones with the least to fear. This talking point that when people dislike something it’s because it affects their personal finances is getting really tired. Not everyone is a greedy selfish prick who only thinks of themselves, pe…

Nobody even started to seriously write books using AI. But at one point there will be AI books on "most read" lists. And a more than one of those will have readership higher than anything by John Scalzi. And he's not bad, I liked what I read of his.

You're probably right, and it will be an incredibly sad day when we have completed replaced the human part of creation in our culture with AI creation

Might just be final nail in the coffin for our cultural stagnation

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#49
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That implies that you did more than prompt the AI and actually learned whatever activity it is you are asking the AI about, because otherwise you wouldn't know to ask those questions. A person making music solely with AI won't ask about tuning their guitar because they don't have one and don't intend to use one.

One could also make hotdogs and eat them without developing any skill as a chef, but it's unlikely there would be thousands of blog posts complaining about the downsides of microwaved hotdogs every week.

If they came out with nutri-paste that gives you all of your nutrition in a grey slurry drink, and replaced everything in grocery stores with it, people would complain

And presumably there would be similarly thousands of posts saying things like "I love my nutri-paste, it lets me skip the boring part of cooking my meals straight to the eating and getting calories and vitamins which is the real purpose of eating anyways"

Re: Generative "AI": The Guitar Hero of Creativity

#50
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Climate Change has accelerated rapidly. We're expecting 3 degrees of warming by 2050 now, 5 degrees by 2100. Betting on the singularity to save us is culty wankery.

I doubt that any reasonable person is actually counting on that. It's a new, and potentially very lucrative, technology. Given time the cost will go down, not up. The way that will happen is increased efficiency. Do I know HOW that will happen? No, but I know that it will. It always has, and there are huge motivations for making it happen.

The most reasonable and sober-minded people are counting on that:

https://www.dpg-physik.de/veroeffentlichungen/publikationen/...

Post reply on HN