Live data from Hacker News

Not by AI

notbyai.fyi

51–60 of 456 posts

Re: Not by AI

#51

Not sure if this is good idea as it provided self identified data from bots to harvest

Well, at least we won't make AI learn on AI-generated data because that , I imagine, would deteriorate quality pretty rapidly.

“I imagine” is carrying a lot of weight there.

AI is already trained using AI models of what humans would think of a proposed output. That has been a huge leap forward, not a deterioration.

Re: Not by AI

#52
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Art will continue to evolve with AI. Another argument I keep hearing (most recently from pg), is that we'll always need non-AI training data. That, too, doesn't follow. Training new models on synthetic data does not mean we get stuck in a particular mode or style. We'll continue moving, improving, and trying wildly new things. Bootstrapping with synthetic data doesn't block evolution - it enables faster evolution, ev…

I think the same. Many artists hate because they feel threatened. I think the opposite: creating art (e.g. Drawing) was only for the ones who had drawing skills. Now, it's being democratized and everyone, regardless of being talented in drawing or not, can freely express their feelings and creativity. I think it's a great thing.

Art is already the most democratically available act. Anyone can learn the skills involved. Its not a select few.

It’s about expressing and finding yourself and developing a soul through creative action, not just a squirting out a picture that looks “correct”.

You only shortchange your own soul’s development by trying to skip the hard steps that it takes to develop a skill like that.

Because you can make an image on a computer that looks like it was drawn does not mean you can draw. Hell, I’m not even sure it means you can express yourself. The inputs you contribute when using an AI prompt are so minimal compared to the informational input required to create something in the physical space.

Don’t let anyone convince you that it’s an exclusive act. Find a pencil and get at it.

Re: Not by AI

#53
post #41

A quote I heard recently that really resonated with me: "Soon, asking a writer if they use AI will be like asking a photographer if they use Photoshop" – e.g., it's a foregone conclusion, and the best artists will generally adapt to using the best tools available

In a novel-writing application - you write the first paragraph and the AI can finish the chapter.

[deleted]

Re: Not by AI

#54
post #40
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…

I imagine there'll be a lot more talk of the soul from a lot of techies from now on. Or at the least talk of the human touch from people who were erstwhile trying to get machines to automate everything.

Hand crafted goods have been a thing ever since industrialization of production started. recently, they market it as upmarket boutique to be handcrafted, and i suspect that ai generated content vs hand-crafted content is going to go down the same route.

Re: Not by AI

#55
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…

Philosophical food for thought: if all content is recycled / mixed from the past, when did innovation and creativity stop? In other words, if there is truly no such thing as an "original idea", then how did the ideas that we are pulling from, deriving from and combining come into existence? If all we are saying is that existing ideas inspire new ones, or that most human generated content is derivative, then I complet…

Combinatoric complexity blows up fast

Re: Not by AI

#57
Well you could just start off by signing your name under the work instead of slapping some anonymous group's badge on your work. In fact, this page seems like exactly the type of underhanded trick an escaped AI bot would play to get more human generated content to train on...

The kicker is the "90% of content will be generated by AI by 2025" quote by an "expert" which links to a Yahoo-TV clips of some rando influencer spouting nonsense. Better luck next time, ChatGPT!

Re: Not by AI

#58
I think the distinction will increasingly be hard to define. If you take a photo today using the latest iPhones, the camera module is doing a ton of image processing, detection of humans in the frame, brightening of faces, etc. The idea of a “no filter” photo is sort of impossible in this world; the camera has already applied a number of filters to improve the contrast and colors in various ways (even if the goal is to match “reality” or what your eyes might have seen at the same time as the shot was taken). Is this AI?

Soon, many digital image editors will incorporate some simple AI-powered features to detect edges, faces, various objects, etc. Are content-aware plug-ins to Photoshop AI?

Re: Not by AI

#59

A quote I heard recently that really resonated with me: "Soon, asking a writer if they use AI will be like asking a photographer if they use Photoshop" – e.g., it's a foregone conclusion, and the best artists will generally adapt to using the best tools available

I feel a better comparison is like asking a painter if they use a camera. At some point we just say “you’re not a painter anymore, you’re a photographer.”
Post reply on HN