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

AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

nelson.cloud

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 493 posts

Re: AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

#331

Post by cognitiveinline »

j_maffe wrote: post #178
Havoc wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Public shaming and rejection are probably the best way to teach That's a wild stance. If you don't like what someone else made - AI assisted or not - you can just move on and not purposefully set out to publicly ruin them...

It's good as a community to communicate what we prefer to read. At least that way the author knows why they're getting the cold shoulder.

Why ruin it for the large community who didnt notice it or mind it, and actually like it? Give cold shoulder by literally walking away. Yelling "SLOP SLOP SLOP" is opposite of cold shoulder, no?

Re: AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

#332

Post by minkeymaniac »

abustamam wrote: post #329
palmotea wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yesterday I encountered AI-generated food photos on a menu for the first time. I immediately felt grossed out before even realising why. Their generated focaccias didn't even look like food, just off-putting trypophobia triggers. Also, that's just misleading. When I see pictures of food on a menu, I expect them to be real pictures of an example of the actual dish I'd get (perhaps made a little more carefully with m…

Not that either are OK, but McDonalds basically stages their food to make it look more appealing, adding stuff that isn't in the product to make it look nicer. https://youtu.be/pSYw8LTXXJM?is=FsJwTFKUkeDt1Z2Y Tangentially, I kinda like the idea of Doordashs crowd sourced food images. Take a Pic of your food before you eat and get like a $5 discount if it is chosen. Customers are not likely to manipulate the product (…

who can forget this scene... https://youtu.be/zJs9p-VNORw?si=sLF7ve6AhrQw8fNn&t=245

Re: AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

#333

Post by abustamam »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #131

I’m inclined to agree, but not as much because the image was generated with AI but rather because it’s rare for such images to exhibit taste. They feel like the visual equivalent of gilded twinkies, which is offputting. Selecting a stock image doesn’t have this effect, even if it’s not related to the post. Even the most unremarkable stock image has the fingerprints of its artist, and the choice itself can reveal thin…

I haven't done research on this but I feel like a lot of stock image companies are using AI now

Re: AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

#334

Post by Laurel1234 »

iamwil wrote: post #316
Laurel1234 wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hence, I think there will be a role for AI generated images and video to be elevated into the fine art in the next couple of decades, and we'll see them in museums and exhibitions Show me one example of AI "art"

Would you be able to pick out an example of "good photography as art" in the first 6 years of photography's existence, given generative media has been around for about 6 years? Does the lack of an existence proof for fine art photography in the first six years mean that photography will never be fine art? Obviously not for us living in the future. You'll need to propose a different, more honest test.

> Would you be able to pick out an example of "good photography as art" in the first 6 years of photography's existence

"Self‐Portrait as a Drowned Man" is thought to be the first staged photograph and it carries a powerful artistic and political message.

Literally everyone in the world with access to a browser can prompt chatgpt for an image. Billions of AI images have been generated yet you can't point literally to a single one.

Illiterate hunter gatherers in the Paleolithic with a life expectancy of mid-20s scrounged what few pigments they could muster and left their hands' imprints on stone. Even in this age of globalization, immediate access to information, and the sum of human knowledge on your pocket, having stood in one of these caves I can tell you it's breathtaking. A billion clanker slop images later and you can't produce ONE (fucking 1) of value. And you think I'm the one who's "lacking perspective"?

But once we have AGI and ASI the Minds will produce great art! Super related to current transformer architecture slop.

Re: AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

#335

Post by harlanji »

Barely longer than a Tweet. Low effort slop. /half sarcasm.

I record 20-40 minutes of "uneditied, one take no fake" Podcast/Vlog per day and have been using AI to generate the cover image + video description and sometimes title for YouTube lately. Also somewhat low effort, I admit. I have project ideas to upcycle the raw takes. (iSpooge Daily on YouTube, support links on channel page).

My likes and views are consistently up since using Gen AI for said tasks. It's extremely niche, just yapping about existence and ideas as a homeless unemployed software engineer in Christ on daily walks. Some of the most authentic stuff online, in my opinion, criminally underrated. The AI art covers and generated metadata are better than I could do even given unlimited time + resources.

Re: AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

#337

Post by entontoent »

FeteCommuniste wrote: post #309
entontoent wrote: post #308

Hmm... where have I encountered this worldview before https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art

You heard it here first, not liking slop means you're a Nazi.

You heard it here for the thousandth time in the history of art: condescension towards new mediums does not make you morally superior, just conservative in a predictable and recurring way.

Re: AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

#338

Post by XenophileJKO »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #275
bonoboTP wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article author should have specified more closely which type of image. Stock image sites had already made generic photos and drawings cheap to include. And indeed they look cheap. The more airbrushed and high quality the cheaper it looks. If a dentist website has cheap beautiful stock nurse photos, it's less valued than real photos taken by a photographer at their location.

It's hard to articulate this stuff, and especially hard to explain it to the AI infatuated among us because they don't really want to understand why people dislike the tooling they're obsessed with. AI is good at many things, digesting vast quantities of information, and code being most of them. Everything else to me looks/sounds like shit. AI music sounds dull and overproduced in a way that a lot of middling pop mus…

The biggest mistake is thinking that your aesthetics are "correct".

You make it a personal slight when you espouse, that your aesthetic preferences are universal and then farther malign people with different preferences by saying that they are not aesthecticly minded.

Re: AI-Generated Images Discourage Me from Reading Your Blog

#340

Post by TaLiTr »

palmotea wrote: post #282
debugnik wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yesterday I encountered AI-generated food photos on a menu for the first time. I immediately felt grossed out before even realising why. Their generated focaccias didn't even look like food, just off-putting trypophobia triggers.

> Yesterday I encountered AI-generated food photos on a menu for the first time. I immediately felt grossed out before even realising why. Their generated focaccias didn't even look like food, just off-putting trypophobia triggers. Also, that's just misleading. When I see pictures of food on a menu, I expect them to be real pictures of an example of the actual dish I'd get (perhaps made a little more carefully with m…

> When I see pictures of food on a menu, I expect them to be real pictures of an example of the actual dish I'd get

I don't get who would think that's a good idea. Like if I order something because the picture shows that the dish has carrots or something and the dish you bring doesn't I'm going to complain.

But then again I can't tell you the number of restaurants that have a photograph of a menu on a website where the original was clearly digital already.

Post reply on HN