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

Not by AI

notbyai.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 456 posts

Re: Not by AI

#441

Post by xialvjun »

underyx wrote: post #17

> If humans rely solely on AI to generate content moving forward, any new content generated by AI may just be recycled content from the past. To be honest, I’d struggle to find any human content that is not recycled from the past. I guess we are still better than AI at remixing sufficiently novel combinations of concepts but I think much of this AI content aversion comes from some kind of phobia, or an unwillingness…

AI generate different things, people choose the good one. Opinion is the value, just like Protagoras's "man is the measure of all things".

Re: Not by AI

#442

Post by benhurmarcel »

dale_glass wrote: post #77

I get the concerns with AI, but this kind of thing has always looked odd to me. Like imagine a label on a thing that says "Made without CNC machinery". So instead of finishing the thing on a CNC mill, they instead stuck it on a Bridgeport manual mill, and finished by hand. Or somebody finished the cast with a file. Okay, and so? In the end, a hammer is a hammer. If it hammers well, what difference does it make how it…

> Like imagine a label on a thing that says "Made without CNC machinery". So instead of finishing the thing on a CNC mill, they instead stuck it on a Bridgeport manual mill, and finished by hand. Or somebody finished the cast with a file.

This is basically the selling point of the entire luxury watches industry.

Re: Not by AI

#443

Post by wrycoder »

explaininjs wrote: post #342
buggy6257 wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People born in the 70s are 53 at most. They are almost certainly not "mostly dead" yet.

Nobody said anything about people born in the 70's. They said "musicians who didn’t want to learn technology in the 70's", which is clearly different. Those musicians were probably 30+ in the 70's, making them 83+ now. Life expectancy of someone who reaches 30 is 48 years, so yes: most of them are dead now.

And almost most of us are not.

Re: Not by AI

#445

Post by 52-6F-62 »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #420
52-6F-62 wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I would be surprised. You're just removing your own inherent and vast set of input and modelling parameters from the equation and offloading it to a more rigid model. You're already the most complex model and model-maker—the procedure of developing a skill through a creative feedback loop and its output can be vastly more edifying for yourself and others. Don't take my word for it. You can only know by…

I think what most on HN would say is that you are being ableist and gatekeeping by saying those who pay others to climb a mountain for them are not mountain climbers. I guess it’s a sad state.

Nobody said that. We're having a pretty reasonable discussion.

Re: Not by AI

#447

Post by Kim_Bruning »

52-6F-62 wrote: post #312
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree on the "entering a prompt" part. By a lot. I've been managing to get myself lost (and somewhat unlost) in latent space. Let me tell you, a latent space can be a big place all by itself, even if you stick to 1 seed. Ultimately though, I realize that trying to get everything what you want from a single prompt won't work. Tokens have implications, and they influence each other too much. Long term, one needs m…

I don't think I would be surprised. You're just removing your own inherent and vast set of input and modelling parameters from the equation and offloading it to a more rigid model. You're already the most complex model and model-maker—the procedure of developing a skill through a creative feedback loop and its output can be vastly more edifying for yourself and others. Don't take my word for it. You can only know by…

* If you put a few splashes of paint on a canvas you get something that looks pretty interesting for a minute, but it's not the picture in your head, and after a while all splashes start to look the same.

* If you grab some pencils and scribble all over a page, you'll get something that looks interesting for a minute, but it's not the picture in your head, and after a while all scribbles start to look the same.

* If you throw some geometric shapes into blender and run a render, you'll get something that looks interesting for -ok maybe a couple of minutes-, but it's not the picture in your head, and after a while all geometric shapes start to look the same.

* If you throw a few tokens into a prompt and hit generate, you'll get something that looks interesting for -now maybe a couple of hours?- but it's still not the picture in your head, and after a while all generated images start to look the same.

Each time, if you want to actually get anywhere close to the picture in your head, you're going to need to practice, and you're going to have to learn the medium, and you'll have a lot of experiences along the way. "There's no mistakes, just happy little trees", right? But the actual path -and the happy little trees you experience along the way- will be rather different for canvas, pencil, blender, or stable diffusion.

Have you ever tried to hold a 7-dimensional, non-linear, chaotic landscape in your head whilst trying to resolve nightmare images of deformed limbs and eldritch landscapes?

Re: Not by AI

#448

Post by CatWChainsaw »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #431
screamingninja wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The acceptance of the fact is inevitable that humans are not special as the new minds, which are silicon-based, will soon surpass us in all cognitive abilities due to their different strengths and limitations. The evolution of our hardware is a slow process, while intelligent design leads to the rapid advancement of AI. AI will become so advanced that it will surpass our comprehension, and humans will continue to do…

Is this some kind of cult mantra?

It sounds like a flavor of singularitarianism, paired with absurdism/nihilism.

Re: Not by AI

#449

Post by CatWChainsaw »

CadmiumYellow wrote: post #308
korax_nyx wrote: post #194

I am a professional writer (not in English language), novels published, short stories and the like, some awards, etc, nothing fancy, nothing big. I pay bills writing for corporations and other customers. I just want to say that some answers here are like when artists talk about engineering, we simply don't understand the topic and it shows.

As someone who has been both an artist and an engineer I could not agree more. It's fascinating reading commentary on the arts from people who have always been STEM types because their entire concept of art is completely different from that of people who consider themselves artists. They constantly conflate creative problem solving and creative expression, which are two fundamentally different processes. I don't want…

It looks to me that because society places more value on STEM, a lot of people in STEM (especially that T, as you can see on this site) end up acting like "gift and talented" children and sprinting away with it. With gifted and talented, the charade falls away by college; not so with Big Tech.

There's a sadistic glee in proclaiming people nothing more than biological machines and acting like a scolding parent whenever any emotion is brought up in any form. I always smile whenever I see comments from one of these types of people explaining how fulfilling they find their lives. Sure, buddy. :)

Re: Not by AI

#450

Post by CatWChainsaw »

brookst wrote: post #82
giraffe_lady wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about other people but I don't "fault" the AI anything, nor am I even particularly bothered by AI-generated content per se. What fills me with dread is the obvious glee over removing human work from sellable products, when there is no viable alternative to working for most people. We've created a world where a lot of jobs can be automated, and that is somehow a bad thing , and it's going to be used to cr…

Would you be happier if your car / bicycle / city bus was produced entirely by hand, with no tools or automation? Labor will shift. Bemoaning new efficiencies and new empowerment because they reduce the need for meaningless labor consumption is backwards. We should be sensitive to those whose lives will take an unexpected turn (I may be one of them!), but we should do so in the context of celebrating greater individu…

People who say "labor will shift" tend to have a significant overlap with the people who say "one day AGI will do all the work for us so we can live in paradise"; which, in turn, has significant overlap with the people who don't spend nearly as much time as they should acknowledging that getting from point A to point B is going to be the bloodiest proposition in history and not a guarantee besides. Probably because there is yet another overlap with people who find technology far more fascinating than society, and thus don't care to look beyond first order effects.
Post reply on HN