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

All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

idiallo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 337 posts

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#261

Post by shinycode »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #178
shinycode wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People just enjoy and value the process of making music. Just like you could enjoy the process of drawing, or doing sports. Given the amount of talented musicians that do not live off their art, most of the time they value the process and the result and if other people like it too and pay for it it’s even better. Most music is not produced to give emotions to other but to the musician. It happens we share the same em…

One person using more software to "make" music does not remove the process or devalue music for another person who wants to use less software to make music. Replace music with anything in this reasoning.

Actually with AI the music is made for you. I don’t have to learn how to play the piano the guitar or anything. I just prompt what kind of instrument I want to. Is that still « making music » ? Idk, for me it’s not the same. In the end I’m not a musician. I just enjoy music. But I can understand that the reality of some people is different from mine as regards to what is « making music ». My view or use of AI does not invalidates theirs.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#262

Post by waffletower »

dubbie99 wrote: post #182
hydrogen7800 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is some tenuous analog between today's AI, and yesteryear's music synthesizers and "modern art". Regarding music, I understand synthesizers were created to mimic real instruments, whereas artists used its capabilities not to mimic, but to create entirely new sounds. My limited understanding of modern art (and without a search I don't distinguish between expressionism, impressionism or any other isms bec…

I don’t agree with your music synthesizer analogy. I own a synthesizer, however I don’t possess any musical talent whatsoever. I cannot for the life of me produce anything remotely listenable from the thing. I know how to use it, but cannot make good music. You just need to look at some street performer banging on a plastic bucket and entertaining a circle of people to realise that the ability to make music is orthog…

This is problematic. It is so common to attach and assume pride to musical discovery. Why can't it be "I discovered this"?

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#263

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

pelotron wrote: post #21
SunshineTheCat wrote: post #6

One of the arguments I keep seeing from people churning out AI video is that the tech is enabling people "creative freedom" that's been made possible now even without the technical know how. However, 99% of the the "creativity" from what I've seen is done by the AI (how it should look, where the cuts need to happen, the tone, color grading, etc). Which is to say, it's taken from other people's (creative) work. While…

I was involved in a conversation about cheating in video games the other day, and the topic shifted to AI use in music. Someone said, "using AI is like using an aimbot for music." I absolutely love that comparison since it highlights the shortcut past creativity/skill to get a computerized best result while also associating it with blatant cheating. The "enables creativity" argument is ironic since the root of the wo…

No, comparing to an aimbot is too charitable. Using AI for music is at best like watching a gaming stream and you barely choosing the game, though not the streamer.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#264

Post by Gagarin1917 »

waisbrot wrote: post #170
Gagarin1917 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no “justifying” anything - the tech is here. Even if you ban it globally, it would actually stop be here and would still be able to cause harm - it would just not be able to be used for good either.

The technology is currently being heavily subsidized and made widely available. If we decided to ban it globally things would look very different. Would it be worthwhile for scammers to run a massive server farm and spend thousands on training and generation? Maybe? It would certainly reduce the quantity.

If you think the tech only exists via mega corporations apps, then you’re very misinformed.

You can generate videos locally. The models anlready exist.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#265

Post by squidsoup »

bena wrote: post #164
SunshineTheCat wrote: post #6

One of the arguments I keep seeing from people churning out AI video is that the tech is enabling people "creative freedom" that's been made possible now even without the technical know how. However, 99% of the the "creativity" from what I've seen is done by the AI (how it should look, where the cuts need to happen, the tone, color grading, etc). Which is to say, it's taken from other people's (creative) work. While…

That’s because they don’t know what creativity is . They believe the idea itself is the creative bit: that thinking of the idea of a dog riding a skateboard is in and of itself a creative act.

Agree entirely - creativity emerges through the process of work, or is "discovered" through work. If AI does the work, it fundamentally can not be a creative process.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#266

Post by gmllama »

tracker1 wrote: post #115
SunshineTheCat wrote: post #6

One of the arguments I keep seeing from people churning out AI video is that the tech is enabling people "creative freedom" that's been made possible now even without the technical know how. However, 99% of the the "creativity" from what I've seen is done by the AI (how it should look, where the cuts need to happen, the tone, color grading, etc). Which is to say, it's taken from other people's (creative) work. While…

It's both... I think it can cut both ways... I was largely on your side, as most of the AI stuff I've seen is just annoying more than anything. Then the "Star Wars: Beggar's Canyon" video completely changed my mind. The voice generation is clear and inflection appropriate... the cuts, sequence, and overall effects are clearly put together in a consistent way. I can only imagine how much work that video was, but is re…

Thanks for name dropping this video, I hadn't heard of it. Maybe I'm just getting old but this felt as empty to me as most other GenAI stuff does. The tech is getting better but I'd still prefer a no-budget fan film that looks worse but has heart (and visual consistency) to something like this. I can meet halfway and say that perhaps this is a modern version of someone being able to play with their action figures and micromachines and show others what they were imagining and that lowering barriers to sharing such things should be celebrated. To mirror my youtube comment though, I'm worried that this sort of thing will stop being a tool to storyboard and play around and will just become the final product for studios who could do so much more.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#267

Post by stronglikedan »

SunshineTheCat wrote: post #6

One of the arguments I keep seeing from people churning out AI video is that the tech is enabling people "creative freedom" that's been made possible now even without the technical know how. However, 99% of the the "creativity" from what I've seen is done by the AI (how it should look, where the cuts need to happen, the tone, color grading, etc). Which is to say, it's taken from other people's (creative) work. While…

> how it should look, where the cuts need to happen, the tone, color grading, etc

That's not creativity. That's skill. A person can think of something (creativity) and not know how to bring it to life without the skills to do so. The creator still needs to have a creative vision, and communicate that vision effectively at the very least.

Of course, there's also people that are just cranking out slop, but I'd argue there's no creativity there, other than finding creative ways to copy others. But that's been a problem since forever.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#268

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

stale2002 wrote: post #239
pelotron wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was involved in a conversation about cheating in video games the other day, and the topic shifted to AI use in music. Someone said, "using AI is like using an aimbot for music." I absolutely love that comparison since it highlights the shortcut past creativity/skill to get a computerized best result while also associating it with blatant cheating. The "enables creativity" argument is ironic since the root of the wo…

> Someone said, "using AI is like using an aimbot for music." Ok. Lets go with that analogy. Whats the problem with someone playing a single player game with an aimbot on? Sure they wont get good at the aiming part. But it feels kinda up to them on if that matters or not. Additionally, I wouldn't see anything morally wrong with that. Now, if someone entered into a music competition, where only human made music was al…

> Whats the problem with someone playing a single player game with an aimbot on?

People are doing it on the server where all the musicians live, and they have no other place to go, only disconnect.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#269

Post by stickfigure »

pton_xd wrote: post #195
wincy wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I made my wife a song about how we met using Suno. It took me about 4 hours to get the lyrics just right, rewriting them (without AI help, it’s terrible with lyrics), plugging them in, seeing how they sounded, fixing them some more to get the verse so it sounded right. She thought it was really special and she cried as we listened to it while holding hands in the car. I can’t play guitar, and I can’t hit some notes w…

> 4 hours That made me imagine -- in the future when AI is much more advanced, maybe I could just prompt it with say "something sentimental to make my wife cry." I mean, I still came up with the idea and ultimately it's the thought that counts right. What's the limit here? Is this some sort of human emotion exploit, or a legitimate bonding experience?

I'm going to draw this example out to make it more realistic.

"Say something sentimental to make my wife cry" you prompt. The computer comes back:

Ok, tell me a few things about your wife. How did you meet? What are her favorite things? Tell me about some great moments in your relationship. Tell me about some difficult moments in your relationship.

Ok, tell me a few things about you. What do you love about your wife? What have you struggled with?

Ten minutes of this kind of conversation and I'll bet the LLM can generate a pretty good hallmark card. It might not make your wife cry but she'll recognize it as something personal and special.

Four hours of this kind of conversation and you might very well get some output that would make your wife cry. It might even make you cry.

The work is adding context. And getting people to add meaningful, soul-touching context is not easy - just ask any therapist.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#270

Post by bccdee »

kmike84 wrote: post #220
lukan wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of music is (usually) to touch people emotionally. If it works, it works. Doesn't matter how it was made. There is no cheating when there is feeling. Generic AI music so far does not touch me. I might tolerate it in the background, but I know there is great music being made with the help of AI. (Which is different from letting the AI do it all) An aimbot in competive playing is indeed cheating and sucks t…

I'm not sure I want AI to touch me emotionally. It feels insincere and manipulative, especially when I don't know upfront if the content (music, video, text) is from another human being or from AI. AI will become good enough to write songs better than humans; it's a matter of time. But it feels like someone tries to hack my mind, exploit my human instincts, it doesn't feel like genuine art the way it was for the whol…

> AI will become good enough to write songs better than humans; it's a matter of time.

I'm unconvinced. The process of songwriting is so dependent on being able to listen to what you've made and decide whether you enjoy it or not. We can train a model to imitate popular music, but we can't train a model to enjoy music, because we can't quantify enjoyment and turn it into a data set. You can train an LLM on soup recipes, but you can't train one to taste the soup and tell you whether it's good or not.

That's part of what offends me so much about the notion of AI-assisted "creativity." Creating music should be a way of engaging more deeply with music, but you've discovered a way to pay even less attention to music than before. None of the details in an AI-generated song really matter; they were chosen arbitrarily, because they seemed normal. Indeed, they are so normal that your ear will slide right off of them.

You can't fix a soup that someone else prepared—not as an amateur. You don't know what went into it, so you can't pick out the individual flavours and decide whether they're right or not. They were never "right" for you, because you didn't pick them. It's like ordering a Big Mac, taking it apart, and trying to workshop it into Duck à l'Orange. All you get is a Big Mac with some orange slices on it. Maybe you like Big Macs; maybe you're happy. It's a pretty poor substitute for creativity, though.

Post reply on HN