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

71–80 of 456 posts

Re: Not by AI

#71

Post by bsaul »

mjr00 wrote: post #35
transitivebs wrote: post #2

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

Exactly, it's a tool. The skill floor, as in the minimum amount of skill to produce something passable, has been lowered -- dramatically lowered -- but the skill ceiling is now higher than ever as a result. It's similar to music. DAWs and samples didn't kill off music; instead, it made it easier than ever for a teenager with a computer and a passing interest in music to create a song and share it with a world. As a c…

i agree with the tool analogy. However there's something different between using a tool, and outsourcing the entire content production by only specifying the end result.

Whenever a customer ask me to develop an app, i don't consider that he did the job. I did it.

Re: Not by AI

#73

Post by chii »

Waterluvian wrote: post #8

AI art created by amateurs is a novelty. AI art created by talented artists and writers is the future.

If a reader is unable to distinguish between the two...

Re: Not by AI

#74

Post by raincole »

Some people are talking about how AI hype is just like NFT hype (with whatever reasons).

Well, to me, these anti-AI things are much more like NFT/crypto. It's just trying to create novelty out of nowhere.

Re: Not by AI

#75

Post by twa34532 »

funnily enough, it think this is a good development for our species.

In the 2000s, if you were talking on the internet, you were pretty sure that you were talking to other humans.

This will quickly reverse as in being sure that one is talking to AI most of the time on anything remote (internet, phone, email, ...)

Which in turn will massively strengthen personal (like non-remote) face-to-face interactions.

Re: Not by AI

#76

Post by dmingod666 »

We as humans have had this argument with automated manufacturing, its a good reference point to predict human behavior.

Second is art itself. We have high quality art prints that a large portion of people are happy to buy. Artists themselves are happy to sell prints of their own work. That product is entirely machine made except for the initial knowledge work by the artist. I'm not making a art, not art argument. I'm saying, people are happy to consume manufactured content, companies are happy to generate it for them.

The argument that 'humans will stop producing and things will stagnate' is totally non-serious and doesn't even deserve a retort really..

Re: Not by AI

#77

Post by dale_glass »

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 got that precise shape? It's not like some inherent goodness is being imparted by a hand file.

Now I get some methods have flaws to them, and some form of associated harm. The problem I see with blaming specific tools is that it's simplifying the problem too much. Eg, if the problem is taking jobs, then picking up one particular tool to blame for that allows manufacturers to use a different tool and cause the same sort of issue. If the problem is say, pollution, then it's not at all a given that the replacement method will be ecologically friendly.

IMO the better thing to do is to target the underlying problem. If say, your issue is ecology, then you want to certify that the manufacture is as environmentally friendly as it can be, not that the thing isn't made from plastic, or there exists the chance that the non-plastic thing will even be worse for the environment.

Re: Not by AI

#78

Post by 52-6F-62 »

miklosme wrote: post #28

> If humans stop producing new content and rely solely on AI, online content across the world may run the risk of becoming repetitive and stagnant. Yeah, because the Netflix catalog, for example, is not repetitive and stagnant. These current advances will enable anybody with a unique idea to produce content. We are right before an immense explosion of human creativity.

Creativity is not equivalent with digital output volume.

I think we’re going to see an explosion of waste.

We are information processors. The input makes the output. What happens when you close that loop?

Re: Not by AI

#79

Post by Waterluvian »

chii wrote: post #73
Waterluvian wrote: post #8

AI art created by amateurs is a novelty. AI art created by talented artists and writers is the future.

If a reader is unable to distinguish between the two...

Then does it matter?

But I’m confident that no amount of AI will make the expert obsolete. Like Photoshop, it’s going to be a complex tool you have to learn to master.

Post reply on HN