Thread

1. keiferski · 1790255905 · focus · HN ↗

   In the world of arts/media, I think AI basically only has a future as a hidden thing. Openly admitting that you used AI to make something will be used against you, in order to dismiss your work. For a lot of people/things, it already is - see Hank Green, or the daily comments about "I don't want to read what you didn't write."

   Expect a massive marketing reversal in 6-12 months, when every "AI-powered" company removes the keyword from their home page.

   1. littlecranky67 · 1790322122 · focus · HN ↗

      > Openly admitting that you used AI to make something will be used against you

      It has always been like that in arts. Back when I was a teenager in the late 90s, my art teacher was a 50+ year old guy that never grew out of his hippie phase and was absolutely non tech-savy. Were tasked to paint a sneaker onto DIN A3 paper, and find our sneaker model from mailorder catalogues of shoeware as a template. Now, the catalogue images were far too small to do a 1:1 copy. But tech-nerdy me had a 486 PC with a scanner and an inkjet printer at home - I scanned the image from the catalogue, scaled it to 2 DIN A4 papers and printed them individually. Then just put them underneath the DIN A3 paper and copied it 1:1 during art classes. Of course I ended up with the greates, most precise image. The teacher took the painting and praised it in front of the class, giving me an A. All this admiration and attribution from my classmates would have gone down the drain, if I just told anyone how I did it. That is basically the same concept - it was the predecessor of AI that I used, and revealing it would have made me a fraud.

      1. qsera · 1790322746 · focus · HN ↗

         >it would have made me a fraud.

         s/made/revealed/

         1. kelseyfrog · 1790407725 · focus · HN ↗

            Fraud exists in the mind of the observer. It's not an ontological statement. The map is not the territory.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.