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. orangedog · 1790256742 · focus · HN ↗

      I really doubt it. I think more and more people will get used to it and accept it. It's not going anywhere. The best artists and creators will figure out how to use tech which empowers them and then what will the rest of the artists and creatives do? Refuse to engage with modernity? I doubt it.

      It only takes a single project to show it works to get other people jumping on board. Some amount of gamers are pretty vocal about it (though I'm sure it's being used in most studios these days in some fashion). If a company creates a game which embraces the "slop" and has great assets on a fun game are people going to avoid it? If that works out, will companies following them avoid it? That's just not how people work.

      1. watwut · 1790257722 · focus · HN ↗

         > he best artists and creators will figure out how to use tech which empowers them

         But that is NOT the selling point of AI in relation to art. The selling point is "it will make all artists obsolete and unemployable". Literally. That is how Sora was sold too. It was not sold as tool for artists. It was sold as replacement for artist.

         If AI ends up as a tool for artists, then that tech failed on its creators terms.

         1. orangedog · 1790258000 · focus · HN ↗

            You're replacing some artist and empowering others. If a single creative can gen a 3 hour movie (we'll pretend it is high-quality), then they can do things which were previously impossible. Was it not marketed as a tool which enabled people to do more?

            1. watwut · 1790259368 · focus · HN ↗

               Again, that is not what either sales pitch was nor long term vision. It was sold LITERALLY with "hahahha artists are useless now, AI will replace them'.

               And quite a few on HN run that talking point too.

               > Was it not marketed as a tool which enabled people to do more?

               Oddly, no. I remeber it, because I found it weird. I found the open hostility toward creatives very noticeable. The way this campaign came across made me reject the "refuse to engage with modernity" style of arguments. If you run around insulting and taunting people, them rejecting you is not necessary rejection of modernity. It is rejection of insults and taunts targeted at them.

               1. eli_gottlieb · 1790319066 · focus · HN ↗

                  > Oddly, no. I remeber it, because I found it weird. I found the open hostility toward creatives very noticeable.

                  Indeed, and we're now seeing similar hostility towards mathematicians, of all people. It's disgusting, honestly.

                  1. ragequittah · 1790456884 · focus · HN ↗

                     I follow AI quite closely and I have yet to see any hostility towards artists or mathematicians from anybody worth talking about (maybe some forum dwellers?). Nor have I ever seen any marketing or implications from big AI companies that says creative work or math is in any way useless or obsolete. The fact that AI can solve long unsolved math problems isn't hostility towards mathematicians.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.