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

Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 433 posts

Re: Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

#221

Post by alberto_balsam »

jsheard wrote: post #83
jonathanstrange wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Searching with "Reddit" at the end of every query helps but I suppose it's only a matter of time when most content on Reddit is also AI-generated.

It's also not much use to anyone who doesn't use Google ever since Reddit started blocking all crawlers besides Googlebot. Old cached results might still show up in Bing/DDG/Kagi but they can't index any of the newer stuff.

What makes you say this? I just tried a few Reddit searches about events from the last few days and they work as expected (tested in Kagi)

Re: Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

#222

Post by Llamamoe »

quasse wrote: post #87
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #53

Almost all of the "product X vs Y" results are AI ramblings now. This growth of the dead Internet is making me want to sign up for Kagi. We're going to need a certification for human generated content at some point.

Kagi is not a panacea unfortunately. I pay for it and daily drive it to support a Google alternative, but I still have real trouble with my results being full of AI garbage (both image and text search). As mentioned, product comparisons are a big one but another worrying area is anything medical related. I was trying to find research about a medicine I'm taking this week and the already SEO infested results of 5 year…

> I ended up ditching search alltogether and ended up finding a semi-relevant paper on the nih.gov and going through the citations manually to trying and find information.

I've been doing this for years now. The normienet as I call it is nigh worthless, and I don't even bother trying to find information on it.

Re: Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

#223

Post by ndriscoll »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #53

Almost all of the "product X vs Y" results are AI ramblings now. This growth of the dead Internet is making me want to sign up for Kagi. We're going to need a certification for human generated content at some point.

Whether something is human generated is (mostly) beside the point. The problem is that spam is incentivized today. Any solution must directly attack the financial incentive to spam. Therefore what's needed for a start is for search engines to heavily downweight ads, trackers, and affiliate links (obviously search engines run by ad companies will not do this). Shilling (e.g. on reddit) should be handled as criminal fraud.

Re: Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

#224

Post by jsheard »

alberto_balsam wrote: post #221
jsheard wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also not much use to anyone who doesn't use Google ever since Reddit started blocking all crawlers besides Googlebot. Old cached results might still show up in Bing/DDG/Kagi but they can't index any of the newer stuff.

What makes you say this? I just tried a few Reddit searches about events from the last few days and they work as expected (tested in Kagi)

https://www.404media.co/google-is-the-only-search-engine-tha...

https://www.reddit.com/robots.txt

Reddit serves a different robots.txt to Googlebot, you can see a snippet of it in Googles summary. If Kagi is getting recent Reddit results then they must be either ignoring robots.txt, using Google as a backend, or also paying Reddit for access like Google.

Bing and DuckDuckGo are certainly still locked out, I just tried searching for "reddit hurricane milton" on both and none of the results are actually from Reddit.

Re: Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

#225

Post by CatWChainsaw »

lexicality wrote: post #102

I've started thinking more and more about a short throwaway conversation in Anathem about how the internet in their world is absolutely ruined by AI and the only solution they have left is a user driven reputation system for entities and how one of the characters just earned a lot of "reputons" for recording an event. Mostly I think about how something like that is going to be signed into law by some state and it'll…

Luckily, Altman already has Worldcoin revved up and ready to go! Isn't that convenient?!

Re: Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

#227

Post by BeetleB »

wenbin wrote: post #31

In the near future, a significant portion of YouTube videos and podcasts will likely be AI-generated (e.g., through tools like Notebook LM). However, I'm uncertain whether audiences will truly enjoy this AI-generated content. Personally, I prefer content created by humans—it feels more authentic and engaging to me. It’s crucial for AI tools to include robust detection mechanisms, such as reliable watermarks, to help…

> In the near future, a significant portion of YouTube videos and podcasts will likely be AI-generated

It's not helpful that you're making a binary distinction here.

As an example, as much as 10 years ago, I would find Youtube videos where the narration was entirely TTS. The creators didn't want to use their own voice, and so they wrote the script, and fed it into a TTS system. As you can expect from the state of the art at the time, it sounded terrible. Yet people enjoyed the videos and they had high view counts.

Are we calling this AI-generated?

We now have better TTS (without generative AI). Way better. I presume those types of videos are now better for me to watch. You may still be able to tell it's not a human because the tone doesn't have much variance. You'd probably have to listen for a minute or longer to discern that, though.

Are we calling this AI-generated?

Now with generative AI, we have voices that perhaps you won't be able to identify as AI. But it's all good as long as a human wrote the script, right?

Are we calling this AI-generated?

Finally, take the same video. The creator writes the script, but feels he's not a good writer (or English is not his native tongue, and he likely has lots of grammatical errors). So he passes his script to GPT and asks it to rewrite it - and not just fix grammatical errors but have it improve it, with some end goal in mind ("This will be the script for a popular video...") He then reviews that the essence he was trying to capture was conveyed, and goes ahead with the voice generation.

Is this AI-generated?

To me, all of these are fine, and not in any way inferior to one with a completely human workflow. As long as the creator is a human, and he feels it is conveying what he needed to convey.

I would love to take a first draft of a blog post, send it to GPT, and have it write it for me. The reason I don't is that so far, whatever it produces doesn't have my "voice". It may capture what I meant to say, but the writing style is completely different from mine. If I could get GPT/Claude to mimic my style more, I'd absolutely run with it. Almost no one likes endless editing - especially writers!

Re: Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

#229

Post by ssl-3 »

coldpie wrote: post #181
ssl-3 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the same Internet. Patreon, forums, Discord, Facebook, Instagram and so on are all centralized. With the Internet of the 90s, discussion happened with decentralized Usenet (owned by nobody) with more-focused discussion happening on mailing lists (literally owned by whoever was smart enough to get Majordomo compiled and running). Email was handled by individual ISPs or other orgs instead of funneled through…

That's a pretty narrow view. My Internet in the 90s and early 2000s was on AOL Instant Messenger and MSN Network, Yahoo! Mail and phpBB web forums hosted by random people with pictures hosted on PhotoBucket. Plenty centralized. The technology doesn't matter, it's changing all the time. The difference is the size of the community, and the barriers to entry. If these communities were easy to discover and join and hard…

I have no reason to doubt your experience.

But AOL IM and MSN were centralized walled gardens that came rather late to the game, and neither PhotoBucket nor phpBB existed at all in the 20th century that is the context here.

Re: Nearly all of the Google images results for "baby peacock" are AI generated

#230

Post by einsteinx2 »

inerte wrote: post #193

Ever since Sora I've been thinking about the overall death of the internet "content". It all came back stronger with Meta Movie Gen. I know there are no girls on the internet, but this AI crap is on another level. Even if find a trustworthy creator, I might be seeing a fake video of them. Say I like MKBHD reviews, I will need to pay attention if I am really watching his video on his official channel. My guard will ha…

> My guard will have to be up so much, all the time, I actually don't think it will even be healthy to "consume content" anymore. Why live a life where almost everything I see can be a lie? Makes me not want to use any of this anymore.

While I generally agree with your whole comment, I feel like this part has been true for years on social media well before AI generated content hit the scene.

Post reply on HN