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

When online commenters detect my art as AI

davidrevoy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#61

Post by tomasphan »

armchairhacker wrote: post #47
Retr0id wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It probably won't look as good if you truly inspect it, but AI can certainly mimic the style .

Sure, but it’s analogous to AI generating a lot of code and a fancy presentation for a product that doesn’t actually work. You can do a lot with that, impress VCs and win stupid hackathons, but the market and need for quality is still there.

This was true 2 years ago but LLMs can now absolutely create production ready programs from end to end, including hosting if you give it the access.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#62

Post by aaron695 »

yunnpp wrote: post #60
johannesrexx wrote: post #59

99.99% of people have zero artistic skill. Those same people feel that they can detect AI-generated works? Those same people have the audacity to spread their uninformed opinions online? Those same people are spreading their harmful opinionated content online, actually causing real harm to real artists. This proves the old adage that opinions are like assholes, everybody has one and they stink. I've been following Da…

It's like people who order a diet coke with sushi and feel entitled to drop a 2/5 review on Yelp because they had a stomach ache. Some people really shouldn't have a voice.

[dead]

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#63

Post by yesterdayjones »

sjoedev wrote: post #41
zkmon wrote: post #32

Creative content authors need to move up the ladder. Use AI fully and apply your talent to make it even better. No need to get recognition for your non-AI organic content. When a machine weaves fabric, no point in sticking to handloom and sell it as handicraft. Use powerloom and add your artistry on top of it.

This is myopic “Silicon Valley” rhetoric and lacks understanding of art or why it’s appreciated. We have video cameras and movies, yet stage actors on Broadway are celebrated like movie stars. People still read books. We have cameras and photoshop, yet a huge market still exists for oil on canvas. We have synthesizers, drum kits, and all the tools we need to make music on a computer, yet live concerts with guitars an…

Every art form you've mentioned still had to be created by a human. The only difference was how. Was it oil on canvas or stylus on Wacom? Was it film or digital? Is the synthesizer analog, digital or a VST plugin, and does it really matter as long as someone is still playing the keyboard with his own two hands?

AI has removed the human element entirely. This is a paradigm shift, and there's more merit in bemoaning using AI to wholesale generate a "photo" than there ever was in a film photographer bemoaning digital.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#64

Post by armchairhacker »

tomasphan wrote: post #61
armchairhacker wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but it’s analogous to AI generating a lot of code and a fancy presentation for a product that doesn’t actually work. You can do a lot with that, impress VCs and win stupid hackathons, but the market and need for quality is still there.

This was true 2 years ago but LLMs can now absolutely create production ready programs from end to end, including hosting if you give it the access.

Again, give me an example

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#65

Post by ivantop »

armchairhacker wrote: post #64
tomasphan wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was true 2 years ago but LLMs can now absolutely create production ready programs from end to end, including hosting if you give it the access.

Again, give me an example

I used replit (no affiliation) and it can definitely do this for more basis use cases (simple crud app, login, etc.)

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#67

Post by account42 »

acdha wrote: post #42
account42 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In both cases people are using the heuristics they have to deal with the onslaught of slop, nothing wrong with that.

The error rate is what’s wrong. A heuristic which has a high false positive rate is worse than nothing because it trains people to ignore all reports.

It doesn't have a high false positive rate.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#68

Post by acdha »

account42 wrote: post #67
acdha wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The error rate is what’s wrong. A heuristic which has a high false positive rate is worse than nothing because it trains people to ignore all reports.

It doesn't have a high false positive rate.

I’ve yet to see it claimed here not in error. AI writing has other tells which are far more reliable, use them.

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#69

Post by ChevalierInWond »

BigTTYGothGF wrote: post #54

It is clearly not AI art when you look closely, the problem is on some of them you have to look closely. The worst to my eye is the Alice in Wonderland one. What's going on with Alice's hair? What's the tea on the left being poured into? What kind of playing card has a 'C' (it can't be a messy Q as the figure on it is male) and why is there only half a heart there? What's with club on the jack next to it? What exactl…

[dead]

Re: When online commenters detect my art as AI

#70

Post by asdff »

jhbadger wrote: post #31

This sort of thing is older than generative AI. For the last couple of decades it has been impossible to share an interesting photograph without someone claiming that it was Photoshopped.

That's been going on a lot longer than photoshop and digital photography.
Post reply on HN