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

Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 75 posts

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#61

Post by rsynnott »

joshribakoff wrote: post #22

This isn’t just a story about an AI logo, it’s a story about locals who feel the business they frequented was replaced by someone trying to make a quick buck. And an owner who believes that means the locals want to “destroy” her business. Im not choosing a side, but it doesn’t seem like they have a strong future with or without a logo. That’s just Santa Cruz culture, very aggro surfers. Many of the surrounding restau…

> This isn’t just a story about an AI logo, it’s a story about locals who feel the business they frequented was replaced by someone trying to make a quick buck.

An AI logo is consistent with that, though. I _do_ think that, in general, using generative AI for this sort of thing is basically declaring "I didn't care enough to do this properly", and that is a bad look for branding at the best of times.

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#62

Post by rsynnott »

huhkerrf wrote: post #4

> One remaining one-star review on Google reads, “Their logo is AI generated, if they can’t make the effort to create a logo they definitely won’t make the effort to cook good food.” I'm not sure what it's called, but there has to be a name for this logical error.

I mean, 'definitely' is strong, but if you're willing to cut corners on the most visible part of your business, there is a good chance you're willing to cut corners on the rest of it.

"Uses generative AI images" is a decent heuristic for "probably crap, best avoided", IME.

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#63

Post by dlcarrier »

joshribakoff wrote: post #22

This isn’t just a story about an AI logo, it’s a story about locals who feel the business they frequented was replaced by someone trying to make a quick buck. And an owner who believes that means the locals want to “destroy” her business. Im not choosing a side, but it doesn’t seem like they have a strong future with or without a logo. That’s just Santa Cruz culture, very aggro surfers. Many of the surrounding restau…

I have family in Santa Cruz, and last time I was visiting, we were talking about pizza places and we identified them by the merchandise they sell.

It is an odd place.

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#64

Post by dlcarrier »

bwb wrote: post #38

I run a Reddit group. Someone thought a fantasy book cover was AI art, and everyone piled on, talked crap, attacked the author, etc. Turns out 100% human by a well-known artist. We had to make a rule against AI witch hunts. It brings out the worst in humans.

The craziest part is that has basically replaced the stock photo and royalty free images market, but that market wasn't really any different than the generated image market. There never was much paid to artists; it's more of a marketing and business development business.

Sure, the most well regarded science fiction and fantasy artists get covers painted just for their books, but otherwise it's usually something off the shelf. I've seen unrelated book covers with the same image.

It's no different outside of publishing, with the same smiling families showing up in advertisements for all sorts of businesses.

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#65

Post by mcphage »

mc32 wrote: post #8
sameers wrote: post #2

There are so many automated processes in a restaurant, starting from machine pressed building materials that took a livelihood away from honest human woodworkers and carpenters. Someone please help me understand why this reaction isn't just the latest form of Ludditism (Luddism?) that'll naturally fade away as time passes.

Even worse is it's just a small percentage of her patrons --but they have made it their temporary life-goal to change the restaurant in their image. Like, if you don't like the logo or how they went about creating the logo, go to a different restaurant and let others enjoy it without your jealous 1-star reviews. Those same people are probably mad "desktop publishing" took the livelihoods of people who drew things by…

> without your jealous 1-star reviews

What makes those reviews “jealous”? Jealous of what?

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#66

Post by mingus88 »

m00x wrote: post #45
spicyusername wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is it that makes this different? That the artists don't get paid anymore. Nobody likes picturing a world without art, and if nobody gets paid to make art... where does the art come from? Nobody likes thinking where this trend goes. If we automate all the jobs away... everyone will starve.

Good artists get paid plenty. The hard part of art was always about either representing emotion, or a story. AI can't do that as it has no emotion, nor story.

> Good artists get paid plenty.

Absolutely false. You don’t even have to try hard to find scores of examples of great artists who died penniless. Artists who lived in squalor for decades until they broke through, and even then made only a modest living.

0.001% of which get “paid plenty” and that’s more due to business acumen.

Creative fields are cutthroat, brutal and soul crushing.

LLMs have proven that most people don’t care or can’t tell the difference between human expression and a probabilistic approximation of it.

On the other hand, this article is about a sports bar logo. Only in Santa Cruz would you see people lose their shit over something so trivial. Are we supposed to be moved to tears by the human expression of a cartoon otter on a tacky surfboard?

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#67

Post by Ferret7446 »

bwb wrote: post #38

I run a Reddit group. Someone thought a fantasy book cover was AI art, and everyone piled on, talked crap, attacked the author, etc. Turns out 100% human by a well-known artist. We had to make a rule against AI witch hunts. It brings out the worst in humans.

The AI is just an excuse, witch hunts have always happened and of course still happen. Yesterday it was witchcraft, today it's AI, tomorrow who knows? Maybe it'll be sympathizing with the anti AI faction

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#68

Post by burnt-resistor »

bwb wrote: post #38

I run a Reddit group. Someone thought a fantasy book cover was AI art, and everyone piled on, talked crap, attacked the author, etc. Turns out 100% human by a well-known artist. We had to make a rule against AI witch hunts. It brings out the worst in humans.

Yep. And people spouting FUD nonsense that they "know" with certainty how to identify AI comments, text, and art. Similar behavior has been running rampant here and should be added to the guidelines.

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#69

Post by bwb »

burnt-resistor wrote: post #68
bwb wrote: post #38

I run a Reddit group. Someone thought a fantasy book cover was AI art, and everyone piled on, talked crap, attacked the author, etc. Turns out 100% human by a well-known artist. We had to make a rule against AI witch hunts. It brings out the worst in humans.

Yep. And people spouting FUD nonsense that they "know" with certainty how to identify AI comments, text, and art. Similar behavior has been running rampant here and should be added to the guidelines.

Ya they do, even after we showed them the proof and the illustrator's body of work they fought us like it was a holy war

Re: Santa Cruz restaurant changes logo after flurry of negative reviews for AI art

#70

Post by bwb »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #58
bwb wrote: post #38

I run a Reddit group. Someone thought a fantasy book cover was AI art, and everyone piled on, talked crap, attacked the author, etc. Turns out 100% human by a well-known artist. We had to make a rule against AI witch hunts. It brings out the worst in humans.

Seems like people just need meaning to exist. 5g, ev’s/oil/renewables, smartphones, privacy, identity…

well said, I agree, and those big things become holy wars even though they largely have zero impact on them. Better to focus on things closer to where they can have an impact, I think they would be happier.
Post reply on HN