Comment by tene80i

Comment by tene80i 5 days ago

It’s an interesting project for assessing the capabilities of current AI models. I would never read it, because I’m not interested in creative work produced even in part by a computer model, when there is so much out there that is top-to-bottom the expression of a human self. I would rather see your unpolished prose or your amateur sketches than something a computer has generated, or even polished.

I do understand that it allows people to be creative in areas they don’t have skill. I can imagine sensibilities changing over time, even if just between generations, in the way Douglas Adams described. Or maybe, as this sort of thing becomes rampant, people will seek even more the authenticity of human craft, despite / because of all its flaws, the challenge of doing it well, and the awe and human connection that results.

fasbiner 5 days ago

Everything you see on your screen was created in part by a computer model, this seems like a way to be rude and dismissive as some kind of status game.

Because you can't actually tell the difference, reliably, for the rest of your life.

You will never know if that detail was borrowed directly from a human hand without alteration, generated and composed, or added with the flourish of a digital pen or brush, or modified via very specific prompt, or edited with photoshop, or edited by an AI agent using photoshop, or a tiny grease stain, a weird compression artifact that ended up looking cool, etc.

You're a fraud if you say that you can reliably know absent of context, and you grasp for metaphysical assertions because you're a fraud.

Reply View 2 replies

tene80i 5 days ago

Eh? I never said I could detect the machine. Only that I would prefer it wasn’t used. I would also prefer not to read a ghostwritten book, even if I would never know it was ghostwritten. The possibility of never knowing something doesn’t mean there’s nothing there to know.
As for the other types of machine help eg photoshop. Yes, it’s an interesting question where to draw the line. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t one. There are lots of areas of human life where the boundary isn’t neat. That doesn’t mean there is no boundary.

Reply View | 1 reply
- fasbiner 4 days ago
  
  Yeah well, I don't disagree with you overall, but this is what getting old feels like. The boundary is so messy because it's based on feelings and desires and reduced neuroplasticity rather than a logical principle. There's not even a coherent explanation of how this personal preference could possibly be realized at the level of policy given the state of play. I'm sensitive to this feeling, but it's a luxury belief of people who can afford to ignore the job market.
  The collective disapproval of online booking sites by travel agents was far more concentrated and economically existential than AI is to artists, and it made no difference. Travel agents who tried to moralize about soulless technology and inferior experiences while costing 10,000% more money for services that their customers felt were similar enough were not saved by moral disapproval cross-pollinated with self-interested hostility to change.
  All the technology that existed when we were young was either a normal part of life or something exciting and new. And then past a certain point, technology becomes suspicious, or unnecessary, or economically threatening, and eventually it gets elevated to a source of danger to the human experience itself. And right or wrong, the next generation has never cared.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies