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

391–400 of 433 posts

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

#391

Post by nozzlegear »

0x1ceb00da wrote: post #380
readthenotes1 wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Baby male peafowls don't exist?

They're called peachicks.

But if I told someone that I had baby peacocks on my farm, they wouldn't look at me bewildered and wonder what kind of animal I'm talking about. If they know what a peacock is, then they know what a baby peacock is, whether I'm using the correct word or not. The same is true if I say "baby cow" instead of calf, or "baby horse" instead of foal. You and I can picture exactly what those animals look like in our heads, and it seems AI can too.

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

#392

Post by ajdude »

jackyinger wrote: post #335
mrinfinitiesx wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Already is. I suggest everybody else de-google as well.

Would you care to share what you do instead? For search in particular, the g-suite, etc. are not such a big deal. I'm really hoping for something other than use duck duck go / bing / etc. because AFAIK they all serve advertisement funded trash and I've yet to hear a really compelling alternative, tho I've been too lazy/busy to try Kagi.

I know you said that you've been too lazy and busy to try it, but I am very happy with Kagi. If you don't want a search engine that serves advertisement funded Trash , then I recommend supporting the search engine whose business model is to provide searches without ads via subscription.

My search lists are curated very well through my settings and even just using the recommended block list keeps a lot of junk out of my search results. If I find a bad site, I can block it from all future results pretty quickly. I also can use regex on the URL's in the search result to redirect things like Reddit to old.reddit automatically. It's very nice.

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

#393

Post by bnralt »

6510 wrote: post #388
bnralt wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We started by putting advertisements on existing content, then moved to social networking and social media, which was essentially an engine for crowdsourcing the production of greater amounts of content against which to show advertisements. I see a lot of people talk nostalgically about blogs, but they were an early example of the internet changing from ever green content to churning out articles on content farms.…

That's a fascinating perspective. I imagine A blog should do something like press releases and describe and progress made on the actual website or plans for-. Forums should then play with ideas and chat is for hammering out details that are hard to communicate or overly noisy and for talking about stuff unrelated to the project.

> I imagine A blog should do something like press releases and describe and progress made on the actual website or plans for-

A lot of older websites actually used to do this with a “what’s new” section or page. With blogging, “what’s new” became the entire site, with almost the entirety of the content (everything that wasn't new) now hidden.

Ironically, after mentioning that discussion dies off incredibly quickly when HN stories fall of the front page, this discussion was moved off the front page to a day old discussion. My guess is that almost no one will see it now.

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

#394

Post by asgdaw141 »

stonethrowaway wrote: post #366
IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

on the contrary. Good fences make for good neighbors. Its not a coincidence that the printing press brought devastating war to europe in the form of the wars of reformation [1] . The internet is another real tool for knocking down fences for free, by anyone. Its only a matter of time when there's pushback by angry fence-owners. We absolutely need less friction and more of minding our own business and focusing on our…

See also the importing of millions of people whose worldviews we cannot reconcile with ours. It’s not just the HN crowd.

I think that said something about your worldview rather than those million.

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

#395

Post by paul7986 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #374
paul7986 wrote: post #329

All AI image and video generators must be forced to add metadata and watermarks and all uploading technology (browsers, iphone & Android SDKs, etc and websites, apps, etc) need to publish/label AI Generated or not. Then search engines worth their salt can filter out the AI crap and boom we are back to how the Internet was or if you want to see the fake crap change the filter.

Might be simpler to have uploads/indexing requires metadata to not be categorized as trash.

yeah that's a good idea :)

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

#396

Post by jeffbee »

nozzlegear wrote: post #391
0x1ceb00da wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're called peachicks.

But if I told someone that I had baby peacocks on my farm, they wouldn't look at me bewildered and wonder what kind of animal I'm talking about. If they know what a peacock is, then they know what a baby peacock is, whether I'm using the correct word or not. The same is true if I say "baby cow" instead of calf, or "baby horse" instead of foal. You and I can picture exactly what those animals look like in our heads, a…

The humans would know what you meant, but the machines do not, because until recently nobody had ever said "baby peacock".

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%203-m&ge...

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

#397

Post by numpad0 »

lsy wrote: post #332

This was probably always the likely outcome of an internet economy that revolves around the production and monetization of "content". We started by putting advertisements on existing content, then moved to social networking and social media, which was essentially an engine for crowdsourcing the production of greater amounts of content against which to show advertisements. Because money is up for grabs, producing cont…

> The only way out I can see is something along the lines of human curation of human-generated content.

That's retweets.

> undesirable human-generated content was already starting to intrude into this business model, but now generative tools are also producing undesirable content faster than moderation can keep up.

> people will become disinterested, and tools which could previously use algorithmic heuristics to determine which content is good vs bad will begin to become useless.

So what these parts are saying is, tiny monoculture of bored college kids are always going to figure out the algorithm and dominate the platform with porn and spams and chew up all resources, and that both improved toolings and tie-in to monetary incentives intended to empower weaker groups to curb kids only worsens the gap, and that that's problematic because financial influencers are paying to be validated by the masses, not to be humiliated by few content market influencers.

But what is the problem with that? Those "undesirable content" producers are just optimizing for what market values most. If that's problematic, then the existence of the market itself is the problem. What are we going to do with that? Simply destroying it might make sense, perhaps.

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

#398

Post by jpk »

Gigachad wrote: post #373
notyourwork wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private chats which effectively become echo chambers further dividing an already divided society is what I foresee.

"Echo chambers" have been the default for almost all of human civilization right up until about 10-20 years ago. You communicated with your immediate circle of friends and coworkers rather than arguing politics with LLM bots on Twitter.

No, this is different. A local bubble populated with a normal-ish distribution of people is different from a distributed bubble populated with people who became grouped either voluntarily or algorithmically.

For example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25667362

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

#399

Post by numpad0 »

throw10920 wrote: post #370
lsy wrote: post #332

This was probably always the likely outcome of an internet economy that revolves around the production and monetization of "content". We started by putting advertisements on existing content, then moved to social networking and social media, which was essentially an engine for crowdsourcing the production of greater amounts of content against which to show advertisements. Because money is up for grabs, producing cont…

> But I'm not sure there is a business model there at the scale the industry demands. This is the kicker. When unfettered by regulation or leaders/workers with morals, most industries would rather avoid human curation because they want to sell you something. Amazon sellers would rather you not see or not trust the ratings because they want you to buy their stuff without knowing it's going to fall apart. Amazon makes…

No offense and I understand, but that use of "AI-generated content" sounds like somewhat of an euphemism. I think there are not significant number of people who specifically prefer AI generated versions, but rather it's referring to certain kind of content that the attempt to democratize and trivialize its generation by releasing AI models had completely backfired.

This distinction is important, because while AI is faster than humans, it's at best cheap gateway drugs into skilled human generations.

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

#400

Post by xnx »

bnralt wrote: post #382
lsy wrote: post #332

This was probably always the likely outcome of an internet economy that revolves around the production and monetization of "content". We started by putting advertisements on existing content, then moved to social networking and social media, which was essentially an engine for crowdsourcing the production of greater amounts of content against which to show advertisements. Because money is up for grabs, producing cont…

> We started by putting advertisements on existing content, then moved to social networking and social media, which was essentially an engine for crowdsourcing the production of greater amounts of content against which to show advertisements. I see a lot of people talk nostalgically about blogs, but they were an early example of the internet changing from ever green content to churning out articles on content farms.…

Blogs were great when they supported RSS, you could subscribe to feed and get updates if they happened every day, or randomly months or years in the future. There was no need for refreshing to see if there was something new.
Post reply on HN