Live data from Hacker News

You Had No Taste Before AI

matthewsanabria.dev

91–100 of 201 posts

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#91
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The most accessible design is not picking colors at all, but letting users or user agents pick the color scheme and only providing the content.

Deferring such decisions to the end user is an ABSENCE of design.

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#92

As someone who works with a lot of creatives, I've noticed people tend to get really defensive and self-righteous anytime "taste" comes up, on both sides - the haute designer-types vs. the scrappy I-can-do-it types. So I won't be surprised if this post is controversial. But it's insightful. Having poor taste (or more charitably, having no taste) can be covered up or ignored by the ability to choose from a pre-curated…

Like it or not, tastes change. Both the personal and society's tastes.

If you look back through the past, you can see some horrid design choices. Thus, some designs we think as awesome right now, will be seen as horrid to our descendants.

So if that's true, what if taste is social? And if it's social, then... well, all people have is peer pressure taste.

And your words show the truth in this, to a degree. Pre-curated options, to ensure "good taste" in choice. And how style conveys social status in some capacity, I don't mean "this style means success" but "this style means you have good taste".

Hair styles can be described as "taste", just as a taste in clothing. Yet hair styles suddenly become "ugly" where a decade before they were "tasteful".

Even beauty changes. One century it's skin and bones, the next more corpulent. Sometimes it's muscular, other times slim.

It's all peer pressure, all social status.

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#93
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rephrased: Any artistic direction done in the interest of creating or increasing profits is overwhelmingly likely to be tasteless. I don't think that's particularly controversial. Profitability doesn't imply tastelessness, but profit motive certainly does.

I would argue that if you can't make a profit you have shown you are tasteless. If other people don't enjoy it enough to pay you, that says a lot about how out of step you are.

The "only thing that matters are money" ideology at its peak.

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#94

“The loudest voices preaching about taste and AI are often the ones who never demonstrated taste before AI.” Yes, and if even these people can tell that AI generated stuff is godawful and tasteless, that tells you everything you need to know about AI.

AI stuff is tasteless in a different sense: It's like food that has no flavor. It "lacks salt" in some non-literal sense. And I think that is not all that surprising, because much of what it was trained on was corporate-speak, which has the same problem.

I would argue the opposite, most of the AI slop I see is gaudy and overwrought, the result of too much flavour carelessly applied.

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#95
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Colorblind have more issues distinguishing shades including shades of grade. These are made by people who see colors too well.

Or people who turn the brightness up on their monitor to "make the sun look dim in comparison".

My TV has its backlight set to '0' (OLED, and a non-real property to set as no 'backlight', but still a metric). If I set it to 100 my eyes bleed. My current monitor with a real backlight has it set to 5. Yes, 5 out of 100.

I think grey on grey works, if the very walls behind you are being bleached by the intensity of the light coming off the monitor.

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#96
post #69

As I get older, I'm more and more convinced that most people are just bad persons. I'm not joking.

Our societies incentivize a bunch of bad behaviors, especially when it comes to projecting the appearance of productivity. So I find that unsurprising.

I'm not Catholic, but I recognize the seven deadly sins as valid moral precepts by any measure. Capitalism advocates for all of them excepting sloth. Get to work.

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#98

I very often hear from developers at clients I work with that code they (not me) generate with AI is not of enough "quality". So I ask them what quality means. So far, I only get the most basic feedback: it should be in X style, pass Y linter, have N% coverage, have documentation... At the same time, most, if not all manually written repositories do not pass the newfound quality metrics that must apply to AI code to…

>So I ask them what quality means. So far, I only get the most basic feedback: it should be in X style, pass Y linter, have N% coverage, have documentation... I'm glad people are thinking about it at least, but let's not pretend like we cared before when it took manual labour

I don't think I've ever worked anywhere that'd accept a PR which introduced untested & undocumented features, in which the code doesn't even pass the company's internal linter.

Those feel like very low bars for your colleagues & clients to set.

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#99
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rephrased: Any artistic direction done in the interest of creating or increasing profits is overwhelmingly likely to be tasteless. I don't think that's particularly controversial. Profitability doesn't imply tastelessness, but profit motive certainly does.

I would argue that if you can't make a profit you have shown you are tasteless. If other people don't enjoy it enough to pay you, that says a lot about how out of step you are.

A true artist is ahead of the tastes of the common rabble.

Re: You Had No Taste Before AI

#100

Taste is a very subjective thing, but I think in a lot of the things described in the article there is a clear better or worse. I would describe that as craftsmanship or attention to detail, more of a craft than an art.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN