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

301–310 of 337 posts

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#301

Post by solomonb »

cruffle_duffle wrote: post #298
solomonb wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you really interpret my statement as "AI content producers are being so creative and then quitting posting"? I'm not talking about people posting good content and then stopping posting. I guess its fair to say that "become repetitive" was unclear, what I should have said was "reveals itself to be repetitive." I'm saying that these AI generated world building channels produce lots of content that looks creative an…

But your argument could be made against anything novel. You love the first 3 seasons of Chopped or Hell’s Kitchen but eventually you figure out the repetitive story arc, you know how each show will unfold halfway through, same kinds on conflict, etc… the show either becomes background while folding clothes or you stop watching entirely. The novelty wears off-for better or worse. I mean look at house hunters internati…

> But your argument could be made against anything novel.

What matters IMO is the lack substance not the quantity of novelty. Your chosen television show examples demonstrate that pretty well IMO.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#302

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…

Would you scream at a child that shows you a beautiful shell they found on the beach -- "you didn't make that!" -- why assume that everyone's ego is entwined with sharing?

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#303

Post by ZoomZoomZoom »

stale2002 wrote: post #277
ZoomZoomZoom wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> where all the musicians live, and they have no other place to go, only disconnect. No actually. Those musicians are free to continue making whatever music that they want and can refuse to listen to the AI music if they dont want to. The fact that 2 other, unrelated 3rd parties both like to make AI music and listen to AI music is not the musicians area of control here. They do not get to decide what other people lik…

You're confused at multiple levels.

> free to continue making whatever music that they want

Never said they weren't.

> can refuse to listen to the AI music if they don't want to

A musician can be a listener, indeed. If you believe a listener has this freedom and will keep it, you're most probably mistaken. No one besides musicians and discerning, ideologically relentless listeners is interested in making NN-generated music distinguishable and supporting the right of filtering it. The goal is to supplant one with the other.

> The fact that 2 other, unrelated 3rd parties both like to make AI music and listen to AI music…

Listeners is not an unrelated party to a musician. They form a vital symbiosis. And it's a zero-sum game, as listener's attention is a limited resource.

> They do not get to decide what other people like to listen to or make.

This is an unrelated point. Who decides what is a separate topic.

The crux of the issue is that we have two types of superficially similar product which are in fact substantially different (hope this does not require clarification) and incomparable in terms of resources necessary for their creation. This begets unprecedented power imbalance and incentives for deceit, biased legislation and other moves to solidify this situation.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#304

Post by dfacto »

I didn't have time to read all the comments but here is Claude's summary for those interested:

```

1. "Good AI work exists when humans stay involved"

Quality AI videos exist but require human editing, scripting, acting - not letting AI do 99% of the work. Examples: NeuralViz, Igorrr's music videos.

2. "AI removes creativity, doesn't enable it"

AI handles creative decisions (color grading, cuts, tone) that were previously human craft. This strips creativity from the process rather than democratizing it.

3. "Execution is the creativity"

Ideas are worthless - execution is what matters. AI removes the execution process, which is where real creative work happens. "Using AI is like using an aimbot for music."

4. "AI enables creative expression for those locked out"

Counter-position: High-concept filmmaking was previously only for the privileged. AI lets people with vision but without technical skills/money/connections realize their ideas.

5. "Race to the bottom / slop flood"

AI's main "strength" is cranking out content at scale, flooding platforms with low-quality material faster than humans can filter. The internet is being overrun with unlabeled AI garbage.

6. "Trust erosion is the real harm"

Even "harmless" AI videos contribute to a world where nothing visual can be trusted. This affects everyone regardless of whether they consume AI content directly.

7. "Theft at scale"

Models exist only because of mass ingestion of creative work without consent. Using AI tools participates in this regardless of output quality.

8. "Platforms will adapt / people will learn"

Optimistic view: Recommendation algorithms will filter slop, people will recognize AI aesthetic as they did MS Paint edits, and good content will surface.

```

Personal take: all these points are true/valid/correct/accurate.

Controversial take: regardless, cat's outta the bag now and there's little we can do to stop it.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#305

Post by evrenesat »

dfacto wrote: post #304

I didn't have time to read all the comments but here is Claude's summary for those interested: ``` 1. "Good AI work exists when humans stay involved" Quality AI videos exist but require human editing, scripting, acting - not letting AI do 99% of the work. Examples: NeuralViz, Igorrr's music videos. 2. "AI removes creativity, doesn't enable it" AI handles creative decisions (color grading, cuts, tone) that were previo…

My personal take: All AI comments are harmful, including summaries. Now I have to update my hn comment summarizer prompt to ignore comments like this.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#306

Post by bicepjai »

dangus wrote: post #98
bicepjai wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have another example. Web development. Dealing with css and designing exact objects or elements in websites was a pain meaning needs technical expertise, time and good idea to be expressed. LLMs made it easier. Still the website created by a dilettante can never compete with one from a creative mind.

Can’t compete in what way? Popularity? Views? Revenue? Profitability? Reader satisfaction? Sometimes a website that looks like shit does its job better than one that is finely crafted. Berkshire Hathaway has a text only website with no CSS at all.

I am talking about differences like these :)

https://ciechanow.ski/ vs https://debugarguments.app/

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#307

Post by pcthrowaway »

cons0le wrote: post #112
badsectoracula wrote: post #16

99% of everything is bad, so that unsurprisingly includes AI videos. But i've seen several good videos made using AI, including pretty much everything NeuralViz[0] on YouTube makes, but also some that have been posted in older comments here in HN. Igorrr's ADHD music video[1] was also made using AI and fit the music perfectly. The common aspect with these "good" uses though is that they do not let the AI do 99% of th…

I'm ashamed to admit that this made me laugh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJllhkPqixM I would be alright with making these more expensive to make though, so they don't overrun youtube. Also i'm sure the person that made this had to do a lot of work. It wasn't just a few prompts

I was actually a big fan of this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQfbA2E7z5A

It features a bunch of internationally known figures (mainly world leaders) in drag (or gender-swapped). So obviously something not achievable without AI video generation

I think it's interesting as a gimmick, but generally really don't like AI-generated videos. My main issue with them is more to do with capitalism than AI video generation though.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#308

Post by stevenhuang »

epolanski wrote: post #135
simianwords wrote: post #18

I have an idea for a movie. Its kind of an epic idea - more about the characters, story and the feeling. I want to get the idea across as close as possible to what is in my head. AI has given me the opportunity to do it. I just have to keep prompting to get the exact feeling and I can share my idea. I don't like these curmudgeonly takes.. I'm sure this "All AI Videos Are Harmful" take will age just like how "All vide…

Imho this is as if you were a music producer and instead of synthesizing the sound you want you were exploring random presets till you found one that matched.

You say that as if that's not something creatives genuinely spend a lot of time on.

Just look at piano vsts, everyone keeps trying things until they find something they particularly like. There's no difference here.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#309

Post by ToucanLoucan »

lukan wrote: post #280
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #237

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. The touching you emotionally part is due to the quality of the underlying creative work. I'm sure the GP's wife was touched- they put in the work to make something- but the fact is that work they did was enabled by the theft-at-scale of work others have done. You can square this with your own ethics…

"You can square this with your own ethics however you like but there's simply no getting away from the fact that all of this, the text, the music, the video, all of it only exists because of theft of creative work on an industrial scale" I know enough of music creation to know, all music we enjoy is created by "theft". Meaning taking a riff from here, a melody from there. And tweaking it. AI just automated it. Not su…

This argument always hinges on pretending that "humans being influenced by other humans" is the same thing as "a model ingesting millions of works without permission," and it just isn’t. Not even remotely.

Human influence is selective. It’s contextual, filtered through taste, memory, culture, and intent. A metal songwriter doesn't subconsciously absorb the entire global corpus of music; they draw from the artists who shaped them, or deliberately subvert something specific. That’s literally the creative process: choosing what to reference, twist, or subvert, reject, counter.

A model doesn't do that. It doesn't choose influences, it doesn’t have tastes, and it doesn't have intent. It just digests everything it's fed into a massive statistical set of averaged patterns that it has found, and then regurgitates them on command so as to "minimize error." Calling that the same thing as human inspiration is like saying a wood chipper is just an automated sculptor because both involve wood going in and differently shaped wood coming out.

The music industry fucks musicians raw, to be sure, but this is not guaranteeing anything for musicians in the slightest, quite the opposite: it just makes it so users of the models can also fuck musicians. How is that good at all? The exploitation of artists at scale being the status quo is not a reason to excuse even more exploitation, that's certifiably insane.

Re: All AI Videos Are Harmful (2025)

#310

Post by stevenhuang »

Analemma_ wrote: post #78
tejohnso wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's only relevant until the AI output no longer has a tone that triggers your gag reflex. Then you'll be in the same boat as everyone else, and the "who cares who/what wrote it, if it has good information" question will apply to you as well.

What will actually happen if and when AI output is indistinguishable from human writing is that I will curate a whitelist of people I know personally whom I trust don't use it, only read from them, and everyone else can piss off. I've already stopped using several websites where the SNR has dropped too low because AI usage is rampant, I'd have no problem extending that to the entire internet.

Sure you will.
Post reply on HN