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

Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

joincolossus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 377 posts

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#301

Post by _DeadFred_ »

pixl97 wrote: post #206
iamacyborg wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It reminds me of what GarageBand or iMovie and YouTube and such did for making music and videos so accessible to people who didn’t go to school for any of that, let alone owned complex equipment or expensive licenses to Adobe Thisandthat. It’s worth reading William Deresiewicz‘ The Death of the Artist. I’m not entirely convinced that marketing that everyone can create art/games/whatever is actually a net positive r…

>is actually a net positive result for those disciplines. This is an argument based in Luddism. Looms where not a net positive for the craftsman that were making fabrics at the time. With that said, looms where not the killing blow, instead an economic system that lead them to starve in the streets was. There are going to be a million other things that move the economics away from scarcity and take away the profitabi…

Yes, being against a society without artists is totally a luddite argument. Being against AI entropy stopping societal progress, stagnating culture at 2025 when humans started stopping contributing to the training set is a luddite argument. Please stop, you are not responding in good faith.

Saying 'I think society should have artists' is not Luddism.

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#302

Post by pydry »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #292
ac29 wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are talking about automating the serving process, not the cooking process. Specifically, you can read about Automats, which were basically early vending machines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat

I don’t understand how this could materially reduce costs compared to current restaurants where you order on the screen and pick up your tray at the counter when your name/number is called.

They dont. Theyre equivalent to those on screen menus that have been around since ~2015.

The point is that the automation of the customer service part of restaurants existed before and disappeared for ~60 years.

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#303

Post by _DeadFred_ »

fulafel wrote: post #196
DrewADesign wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad faith argument. Did the printing press write shitty books? No. It didn’t even write books. Does AI write shitty books? Yes. Constantly. Millions. Books took exactly the same amount of time to write before and after the printing press— they just became easier to reproduce. Making it easier to copy human-made work and removing the humanity from work are not even conceptually similar purposes.

Nitpick: the press of course did remove the humanity from book-copying work, before that the people copying books often made their own alterations to the books. And had their own calligraphic styles etc. But my thought was that the printing press made the printed work much cheaper and accessible, and many many more people became writers than had been before, including of new kinds of media (newspapers). The quality o…

Initially the printing press resulted in LESS writers, because people just copies others works. In fact, they had to establish something called intellectual property law in order to encourage people to write again.

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#305

Post by _DeadFred_ »

psolidgold wrote: post #284
KPGv2 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With AI if you want 2x or 5x or 10x as much art Imagery AI does not produce art. Not that it matters to anyone but artists and art enjoyers.

Stop trying to impose your narrow-minded definition of art onto other people. If you disagree, that's fine, but you've lost my respect the moment you tell someone else that their definition of art is wrong.

Art without intention isn't art. The entire point of art is the human intention by it. The pattern on linoleum isn't art. The beautiful wood grain in my table isn't art. And shitty AI images/music aren't art.

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#306

Post by selimthegrim »

grues-dinner wrote: post #300
iamacyborg wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, brands literally test creatives all the time.

And yet they'll also spend literally millions writing just the company name 100 times around the periphery of a sports field. That's not creative, that's just repetition. On the graph of spend over the spectrum between that to a genuinely creative live-action advert that is actually memorable for being real (maybe the guy doing the splits between two Volvo™ lorries?) there is a lot of area representing of dross that…

Essence festival in New Orleans had a Coke sponsored ad recently that I’m pretty sure had AI generated food in it.

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#307

Post by _DeadFred_ »

sixtyj wrote: post #125
Waterluvian wrote: post #17

I think the interesting idea with “AI” is that it seems to significantly reduce barriers to entry in many domains. I haven’t seen a company convincingly demonstrate that this affects them at all. Lots of fluff but nothing compelling. But I have seen many examples by individuals, including myself. For years I’ve loved poking at video game dev for fun. The main problem has always been art assets. I’m terrible at art an…

Easy entry not equals getting rich.

Something like 200,000 new songs are uploaded to music services every day because tech lowered the barrier to entry. How's that working? Lots and lots of new rich musicians?

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#308

Post by qwertygnu »

unleaded wrote: post #233

Something that's confused/annoyed me about the AI boom is that it's like we've learned to run before we learned to walk. For example, there are countless websites where you can generate a sophisticated, photorealistic image of anything you like, but there is no tool I know of that you can ask "give me a 16x16 PNG icon of an apple" and get exactly that. I know why —Neural networks excel at fixed size, organic data, bu…

As you seem to understand, creating something that generally fits a description is the walking for AI. Following exact directions is the running. It may just feel reversed because of the path of other technology.

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#309

Post by hexo »

postholedigger wrote: post #225
hexo wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

your example is complete nonsense as digging a hole is not creative in any way at all

How many holes have you dug? What was the soil like? What was the weather like? What equipment did you use? Do you dig during daylight only?

More than you did. Yeah, it was so creative.

Re: Will AI be the basis of many future industrial fortunes, or a net loser?

#310

Post by tim333 »

>The disruption is real. It's also predictable.

I'm not sure it is very predictable.

We have people saying AI is LLMs and they won't be much use and there'll be another AI winter (Ed Zitron), and people and people saying we'll have AGI and superintelligence shortly (Musk/Altman), and if we do get superintelligence it's kind of hard to know how that will play out.

And then there's John von Neumann (1958):

>[the] accelerating progress of technology and changes in human life, which gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue.

which is what kicked of the misuse of a perfectly good mathematical term for all that stuff. Compared to the other five revolutions listed - industrial, rail, electricity, cars and IT, I think AI is a fair bit less predictable.

Post reply on HN