71–80 of 93 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the risk of stating the obvious, you don't have to let AI come up with your ideas. You can just use it to execute them.
If the AI comes up with better ideas, then why would you put yourself at a disadvantage? Especially if people consider it just another tool even if it did all the creative thinking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's... wildly different from asking an AI to generate an image and then tracing it.
How is paraphrasing AI text different from paraphrasing AI images? It's still paraphrasing (with different mediums).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the AI comes up with better ideas, then why would you put yourself at a disadvantage? Especially if people consider it just another tool even if it did all the creative thinking.
Indeed, why would you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lots of people have written good books, nobody has managed to make AI do anything near that level. Being the first to do something is always impressive.
> Being the first to do something is always impressive. The companies are making the AI creative (whatever the definition), not her. Don't give her credit for something she had no impact on. She's using AI for world building and working on top of it. Ask a few people whose job is world building (e.g. games) and no one will tell you that using AI is to be proud of.
> The companies are making the AI creative
None have managed to at the level we are talking about. There is also some skill involved in the use of AI. If she somehow made AI operate on a level far beyond the status quo, that would be an achievement. She didn't so its moot, but if she did it would be an accomplishment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's clickbait. She gave an interview where she said she used AI to help get her brain going, and the headline made it sound like she had AI write the book. It's not clickbait. > Często wprost rzucam maszynie pomysł do analizy z prośbą: kochana, jak mogłybyśmy to pięknie rozwinąć? > I often directly throw an idea at it for an analysis asking: darling, how could we expand this beautifully? Source: https://lubimyczyt…
That's... wildly different from asking an AI to generate an image and then tracing it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Being the first to do something is always impressive. The companies are making the AI creative (whatever the definition), not her. Don't give her credit for something she had no impact on. She's using AI for world building and working on top of it. Ask a few people whose job is world building (e.g. games) and no one will tell you that using AI is to be proud of.
The fact is she didn't actually use AI, so this is hypothetical. > The companies are making the AI creative None have managed to at the level we are talking about. There is also some skill involved in the use of AI. If she somehow made AI operate on a level far beyond the status quo, that would be an achievement. She didn't so its moot, but if she did it would be an accomplishment.
She actually did. See my other comment:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48210766
She also said:
> jak fantastycznie powiększa on horyzonty i pogłębia myślenie kreatywne
> how incredibly it widens horizons and deepens creative thinking
AI doesn't have the ability to improve one's creative thinking. In order to improve, you have to practice - there's nothing more to it and it applies to all professions.
Also, I wonder how did she come to the conclusion that it does so.
She uses the AI for a job that should be hers, not the AI's.
Furthermore, she publicly stated she bought the highest plan without specifying the model.
> None have managed to at the level we are talking about.
You seem to be implying somebody accused her of relying purely on AI, which no one actually did.
Many good Polish writers (as stated in the Lubimy Czytać article) said that for them it's unimaginable to use AI for writing, in any form.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact is she didn't actually use AI, so this is hypothetical. > The companies are making the AI creative None have managed to at the level we are talking about. There is also some skill involved in the use of AI. If she somehow made AI operate on a level far beyond the status quo, that would be an achievement. She didn't so its moot, but if she did it would be an accomplishment.
> The fact is she didn't actually use AI She actually did. See my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48210766 She also said: > jak fantastycznie powiększa on horyzonty i pogłębia myślenie kreatywne > how incredibly it widens horizons and deepens creative thinking AI doesn't have the ability to improve one's creative thinking. In order to improve, you have to practice - there's nothing more to it and…
Author writes book using word processor.
Author writes book using typewriter.
Author writes book using ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The fact is she didn't actually use AI She actually did. See my other comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48210766 She also said: > jak fantastycznie powiększa on horyzonty i pogłębia myślenie kreatywne > how incredibly it widens horizons and deepens creative thinking AI doesn't have the ability to improve one's creative thinking. In order to improve, you have to practice - there's nothing more to it and…
[flagged]
> She uses the AI for a job that should be hers, not the AI's.
Also what would she otherwise buy the AI for? Cooking recipes? I'm on the free plan and hardly hit any limits.
She didn't ask it "what profession could person X be in an Y novel". She asked it to develop (rozwinąć) a story.
It's not that hard to understand that developing a story is actually her job.
Small details (profession, name, colours) are ok (my opinion). Developing parts of the story is not.
You may wonder where the line is - many reputable Polish writers are in consensus - no AI.
AI should have no place in creative works.
You are free to think otherwise. However I don't think those writers are wrong, especially if they're talking on a subject that is their profession, I'm no writer.