Not by AI
notbyai.fyi
Not by AI
1–10 of 456 posts
Re: Not by AI
#2A 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
Re: Not by AI
#3Not sure if this is good idea as it provided self identified data from bots to harvest
Re: Not by AI
#4A 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
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, even. (I'm using synthetic data to train new models to great effect.)
People are angry that we've lowered the opportunity cost barriers and so they're expressing their frustration.
It's a good thing that life's choices no longer fence us in as much. Everyone should get a chance to learn how to express themselves through art with the new regime of tools. Despite changing economics, there will still be a top 1% that do better than the rest of us.
Re: Not by AI
#5I like it. I like the idea of not having a war on AI-generated content, rather, simply declaring that a non-AI-generated content is what it is, while being OK with AI-generated content too (unless they abuse the badge, of course).
Re: Not by AI
#6A 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
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.
Re: Not by AI
#7Your new mission as a human is to write is such a way that nobody suspects you are an LLM. When you are done writing, ask an LLM to write on the subject you have addressed, and if the output is similar, scrap yours and start over. If you need a badge to alert people to your humanity then you have been acting like a robot, a behavioral deficiency only you can correct.
Re: Not by AI
#8AI art created by amateurs is a novelty.
AI art created by talented artists and writers is the future.
Re: Not by AI
#9Not sure if this is good idea as it provided self identified data from bots to harvest
But still, content creators get badges/s
I generally agree that it will become increasingly harder to distinguish non-AI generated content and authenticity will suffer a lot. Maybe the solution to this is get connected with other humans directly and provide authenticity as first hand experience.
Re: Not by AI
#10A 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
Cortes vs the Aztecs