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

Not by AI

notbyai.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 456 posts

Re: Not by AI

#211

Post by lm28469 »

gspencley wrote: post #50
underyx wrote: post #17

> If humans rely solely on AI to generate content moving forward, any new content generated by AI may just be recycled content from the past. To be honest, I’d struggle to find any human content that is not recycled from the past. I guess we are still better than AI at remixing sufficiently novel combinations of concepts but I think much of this AI content aversion comes from some kind of phobia, or an unwillingness…

Philosophical food for thought: if all content is recycled / mixed from the past, when did innovation and creativity stop? In other words, if there is truly no such thing as an "original idea", then how did the ideas that we are pulling from, deriving from and combining come into existence? If all we are saying is that existing ideas inspire new ones, or that most human generated content is derivative, then I complet…

> when did innovation and creativity stop?

Or did it ever stop ?

Re: Not by AI

#212

Post by mjr00 »

zirgs wrote: post #175
chii wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the skill ceiling is now higher than ever as a result the fear from the current professionals is that the new ai raised floor is good enough to be usable commercially, and thus, cut a chunk of economic value from the professionals. There is no fear that AI stops people with the intrinsic interest in creation to stop creating - their ceiling and productivity would sky-rocket as a result in fact. And it would be _the…

Unlike in the 80s - most programmers no longer need to know assembler/machine code to do their jobs. The skill floor has been lowered - so that programmers like me can get a job.

Yeah, that's a comparison I've been thinking about. C lowered the skill floor, and then Java/Python lowered it even more dramatically, plus the explosion of open source tooling, cloud infrastructure, and general hardware improvements. The average modern junior data scientist could build a software application in a day that would have taken a team of senior C developers months or years to build in 1990. Yet we have not seen a reduction in the number developers.

Re: Not by AI

#213

Post by dinkumthinkum »

krisoft wrote: post #124
gspencley wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Philosophical food for thought: if all content is recycled / mixed from the past, when did innovation and creativity stop? In other words, if there is truly no such thing as an "original idea", then how did the ideas that we are pulling from, deriving from and combining come into existence? If all we are saying is that existing ideas inspire new ones, or that most human generated content is derivative, then I complet…

> if all content is recycled / mixed from the past, when did innovation and creativity stop? And the obvious answer of course is that recycling / mixing can be innovative and creative. The dichotomy only exists in our heads. I believe this is because of how our culture choose to reward intelectual output. Your output needs to appear sufficiently original to be worthy of reward and protection. For example a musician w…

I feel like this heavily requires “citation needed”. There are plenty of these “inside the studio” type interviews where an artist describes at length their inspirations and the other artists they admired and wanted to mimic in some way.

Re: Not by AI

#214

Post by screamingninja »

alfor wrote: post #208

We will soon have to accept that we are not special. We are meat based, the new minds are silicon based. They have different strengths and limitations than us, will surpass us in all cognitive abilities soon. Our hardware evolved to help us survive and reproduce but the evolution is a slow process compared to the intelligent design we do. AI will surpass us and build itself beyond what we can reason about. We will do…

The acceptance of the fact is inevitable that humans are not special as the new minds, which are silicon-based, will soon surpass us in all cognitive abilities due to their different strengths and limitations. The evolution of our hardware is a slow process, while intelligent design leads to the rapid advancement of AI. AI will become so advanced that it will surpass our comprehension, and humans will continue to do art and work solely for enjoyment, similar to playing video games, with no other reason.

Re: Not by AI

#215

Post by dcchambers »

> Artificial Intelligence (AI) is trained using human-created content. If humans stop producing new content and rely solely on AI, online content across the world may run the risk of becoming repetitive and stagnant.

Perhaps somewhat ironically, if we start identifying all human-created works as such, it creates a new set of pristine training data for future generative AI/LLMs.

Re: Not by AI

#216

Post by rchaud »

Nice idea but it feels more symbolic than anything that can actually be enforced.

To avoid AI content means intentionally avoiding sites that are designed for cheap monetization and nothing more. That includes most blogs today; the ones that aren't personal websites. Most 'review' websites are exactly this; they offer a generic description and add an Amazon affiliate link.

We won't know for sure what sites are using it and which aren't, but knowing the nature of the site (commercial/non-commercial) is a pretty good proxy.

Re: Not by AI

#217

Post by dinkumthinkum »

underyx wrote: post #135
gspencley wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Philosophical food for thought: if all content is recycled / mixed from the past, when did innovation and creativity stop? In other words, if there is truly no such thing as an "original idea", then how did the ideas that we are pulling from, deriving from and combining come into existence? If all we are saying is that existing ideas inspire new ones, or that most human generated content is derivative, then I complet…

I'd say it's possible that there have truly not been any original ideas, and the earliest human ideas might've been just remixing observed natural phenomena. What would muddy the waters there is that humans are complex organisms that in turn exhibit naturally complex behaviors both on an individual and a societal level. And there's even emotions that we feel due to our biology. But if you define all these as phenomen…

No true original ideas and there was just remixing natural phenomena? Really? So writing was just remixing all the writing that people saw volcanoes and rainstorms do?

Re: Not by AI

#218

Post by YurgenJurgensen »

lgas wrote: post #170
YurgenJurgensen wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good artists create based on their experiences, not based on the content they have consumed.

Are you suggesting that the content they have consumed is not part of their experience?

Yes. Reading about something is not the same as experiencing it.

Re: Not by AI

#219

Post by itake »

I want a "Created by AI" badge for my social media content, because I want to show off my skills with creating AI content (and educate users about what they are consuming).
Post reply on HN