Expect a massive marketing reversal in 6-12 months, when every "AI-powered" company removes the keyword from their home page.
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.
I didn't know if generative ai has a strong enough signature to go through the same evolution, but I wouldn't be shocked if it did.
AI is still in the 2010 autotune phase, where more is better.
This feels similar to the timeline that lots of new technologies go through. Blockchain (put that into everything!). The internet + dot com era were probably similar as well.
Treating ANYTHING like an everything tool just seems to feel this way. There's no reason I want to use AI to buy something on Amazon. Or plan a vacation for me. I absolutely want to use AI to scan through 5000 files and find that one thing I was looking for though. Different applications.
I think AI is there to stay for corporate media. The mental image of what is art and what is just a product for a company will just have to change.
Imagine how portrait painters must have felt when cameras rolled around. Yet there is a place for painting and for photography, both in art and (at least until now) in corporate media.
As long as people lie about using a tool and claim they did it with the high effort way, this won't be able to settle into a new reality without people fighting about it.
I think there will be a place for AI in art too - just not in doing the same thing as current artists are doing (and expecting the same praise for less effort), but there will be a niche for it too.
Historically, including "AI" in a name meant it wasn't complete or ready for prime time use.
I'm not convinced our AI nor ML implementations that throw "AI-powered" into the marketing copy have meaningfully changed that notion.
We don't call spellcheck "SpellcheckAI" or "SpellcheckML" but it is arguably one of the best integrations of AI we've ever seen.
I wonder if any movie special effects that you notice will be considered AI?
Zach King is a YouTuber to watch on this topic.
The slogan that keeps coming to mind to me is 'AI has a massive PR problem'
When such a disruptive and powerful technology is made popular by slop art that undervalues creators and shits upon the cultural value of the arts, by unlikeable billionaires telling people how you'll soon be out of a job, by having it forced upon you by your boss, by marketing teams pushing for doomerism to increase the IPO value, you know that no PR campaign will ever save it and make it palatable for the masses.
And it's for the best, I'll say. AI as a technology is here to stay, but the masses will be wary and mildly disgusted by it for a very long time. The lunatic dreams of artificial superintelligences ruling over humanity are accepted to be blasphemy, not a glorious future to rush towards. The tech world is still too far deep in its echo chamber to see that no one really wants whatever they are selling.
That’s because it’s not your work.
I didn't end up buying at that point, but 6 months ago my existing phone failed, so I had to return to the shops. Same phones for sale more or less, but not a single word about AI anywhere.
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.
However. The amount of pizza/kebap places that did an AI redesign of their shop AND MENU is crazy. The amount of cars that advertise small businesses using basically Disney style straight out of an AI. Like nearly every local event is basically just "Chatgpt make me flyer" with factual errors in the texts, even the in my local hospital that's what info flyers look like ...
And seriously. Didn't they look at there kebap? It looks nether apetizing nor like a kebab, why would they print that oversized and glue it on their business? Something very real they build over years with hard work.
It's like individuality is dying in front of our eyes
For e.g millennials, we didn’t have internet until our teens, and the early years of the internet looked very different from the ad-infested hellscape that it is today.
Disdainfully dismissing genai media with “that’s so ai” as cited.
Eager to use it to explore. My 10yo would love to research his favorite subjects- Pokemon, WWI fighter aces, Sweden, Weird Al - with a chatbot. I give him Wikipedia and books instead and he’s happy.
He tinkers with coding and ai is so useful for that. Outside of Scratch most programming has incredibly obnoxious environments to setup. He can’t install anything at school. He doesn’t want to edit PATH variables or choose a dev server for simple html/css/js. AI can almost always find a way forward and let him get to the tinkering.
I learned on Apple BASIC and Microsoft QBASIC. One magic keystroke or one command and you were in a dev environment that matched everyone else’s. If a book was written for the computers I had access to, “setup” was nil. I was tinkering instantly and with a high level language shockingly close to the metal.
If genai helps Gen Alpha cut through the incredibly deep pile of abstractions on modern programming platforms, then great! Keep kids hacking.
Even way back in the 90s we could tell that Coca Cola isn't actually a requirement for a good Christmas, and your friends who wore platform shoes were not somehow unique.
But still, when you're young you're in a prison. There are very few things you can do that aren't connected to some corporation whose main goal is just to make money.
An earlier Yahoo article on this mentions adult use of the phrase on Tiktok, if perhaps with different intent: https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/article/the-cryptic-meaning-...
Perhaps criticial thinking is not in decline
https://trends.google.com/explore?q=%22That%27s%20so%20AI%22... https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=That%27s+so+...
Now there are some contexts where humans do not care. And there are some contexts where humans do care.
E.g background music in the commercial-chain gym whilst people have headphones on? Ofc they don’t care lol. This is already happening.
Whereas background music in specialists gyms e.g powerlifting or bodybuilding? No you won’t hear AI background music.
Not sure what’s wrong with people on this thread. Don’t y’all understand nuance or is your brain that fried?
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2026/sep/07/death-o...
"Kids come on beans are good for you, you can't have dessert without also eating your beans" -> "That's not true beans are unhealthy you got that from AI"
Even seemingly unrelated shit "Clean your room", or "No it's time for bed your brain needs sleep" -> "that's so AI"
On the other hand, by the very nature press-a-button content is so easy to make that it will naturally bury real content unless someone takes an active gate keeper role. (Every channel on Youtube I know has made in-depth complaints that this is not happening there.)
I hope we find a way around it, so that we can enjoy content and products that is made with the same amount of effort as before but with more powerful tools creating a better end result. Not to mention lower barrier to entry into creative spaces, giving us more perspectives and ideas expressed in a quality way.
[deleted]
How do we keep falling for this, over and over again? It's old tactics in new names; stop falling for tricks people use to evade your scrutiny and accountability and grow up past your infantilism and naivety. If you are reading this you are likely an adult, and probably a smart one. You can handle some discomfort and I implore you to see past this mainstream carricature of the truth.
[dead]
Young people by definition (Sub 16 years old in this case), by definition, lack experience. There's a reason they can't drink, drive, vote, give consent, or be held legally accountable for their actions (the same way an adult can).
So why should I give a flying $TOKEN about what they think of it?
Edit: I can also see the use of tracing with very small children or beginner adults with poor motorics to develop muscle control, to learn how to control the line weight and variation. It is really ineffecient when learning how to see and understand the 3D forms, though.
Tracing is a cardinal sin.
People lose careers over not understanding the massive difference.
s/made/revealed/
You realize that the admiration and attribution wasn't real, because you didn't actually do what you claimed? I get that you wanted to feel the effect, but that doesn't mean NOT revealing that you didn't do what you were being praised for made it real.
Revealing it makes you known as a fraud.
[dead]
Philip Steadman, Vermeer's Camera: Uncovering the Truth Behind the Masterpieces, Oxford University Press, 2001
lol! /s
The revealing thing is how the cheating is seen as normal and how the other people are considered out of touch or wrong.
I could come up with a thousand examples, but I remember when I was in college and listening to a lot of 90s music. Blink 182 had this album come out, and I couldn't even listen to 3 seconds of vocals because of the insane amount of pitch correction grinding the life out of everything:
Though if 2010, the year that Lost in the World was released, is your marker of an awful era, then I suspect that when generative ai does get used to create real art you will likely not be a fan of that either.
Or 22, A Million by Bon Iver.
[deleted]
AI is literally the exact opposite of that. We had been building software with ruler-like precision even when it was unnecessary and got in the way. That's the only reason we ever wanted AI to begin with.
One mistake people keep making is the assumption that arbitrary and probabilistic imprecision ("wisdom of the crowd") is automatically equivalent to artistic or experienced/curated choice. It's absolutely not. Another mistake is that approximations are always enough to satisfy all problems, or at least "real world" problems. That's obviously not true either. That's flat out ignorance.
What I’m saying is he made an explicit artistic choice to use AI and it’s an integral part of the work. You can’t tell a creative person they aren’t allowed to do something.
AI is going to be used, and already is used, by creative people for legitimate uses that only enhance the statements they are making.
The fact that lazy people are using it as a shortcut for a lazy audience is not an indictment of AI
That sums it up for me. This "new thing appears, become hot, gets overplayed, people hate it" cycle happens over and over, but that is trendy norms. Meanwhile, creative use will continue to go up and to the right as people learn how to better wield AI to express themselves.
The future won't be "AI in art is bad" but "AI as a tool of artists is powerful, AI as an artist is nonsensical".
Nah, they were still keen to let people know it made you a clown.
What can generative AI do that can't be done, and done better, otherwise? Nothing.
It's not an attempt to replace or add an artistic medium; it's an attempt to replace the artist. It doesn't open new avenues of expression, and it has negative journalistic value too.
People who "make AI art" are not making art, nor making anything else. They are commissioning images/videos/text from a bot, just as people commission art from humans. The amount of praise/admiration this deserves is zero.
[dead]
AI + a custom search engine - which might not use Google's metrics, or Google's sponsorship - would be a killer product.
So my prediction is that a lot of aggregator and middle man sites - like Amazon - could disappear within the next decade.
And Google might too.
An open network of independent search agents would be a gamechanger for the entire Internet.
Which is not to say this would be easy. But AI is actually well-suited to making ideas like these possible.
It would - finally - be genuine disintermediation.
You are using Claude like people use search engines. Back then there were tons of people who said they don’t need the internet or google to buy things just like they say the same things with AI
But people don’t control the market. Once Amazon bullied their way to 50% of all retail sales people no longer had a choice. It’s all coming from the same warehouses so you might as well get the lowest price
If it’s cost effective to have an LLM operated business, that business will outcompete the ones you like until they either fold or end up looking like everybody else.
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.
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.
But also people have bad taste. AI music really only works on people who don’t critically listen to it. Most people just seem to want a catchy hook and the general structure of a pop song, and that’s how Spotify gets away with it.
But you ask people to pay even $1 for a track they will listen to hundreds of times? No thanks.
So people get what they deserve.
For example, creating a game where before you'd have to pay for assets or creating a movie to where you'd have to pay for a lot of various things. I gave an example earlier where I've watched vids people generated based on existing fiction. These are artists (you're still framing the shot, selecting dialogue, etc), and they could not have done this before; it would have been too expensive.
Some artists get cut out of the loop but it allows small teams to do what was impossible. Is this not valid?
The animated movie Flow won an Oscar, and that was made by a very small team and entirely in Blender.
Fanvids and AMVs made by clever sampling and splicing have been a thing for a very long time, too.
There are also a lot of games that exclusively use free or self-made assets.
Money allows access to better tools and bigger teams. But replacing artist jobs with AI doesn't seem like a great way for artists to get money (or time to focus on art, for that matter).
Generative AI, especially for video, also keeps getting more expensive, as AI companys' bills finally come due.
Just iteratively refusing what a stochastic generative algorithm presents to you doesn't make you an artist. It makes you a client with attitude.
God I hope so! Modernity sucks.
On the one end - somebody writing a book alone with a pen and paper, about an idea they had in a dream. Whilst they didn't make the book from nothing (somebody else created the pen and paper, somebody taught them how to write and structure a story, they are just using them to write a book) This is very clearly the work of that one person.
On the other extreme, imagine a wealthy person hires a writer to write a book. They specify that it should be about unicorns but nothing more. Let's imagine that they haven't even read the book yet. Can the wealthy person claim "I wrote this"? Most people would say no. They caused the book to be written, but didn't actually write it.
In my mind, asking an LLM to create something for you is more like the second example than the first, but there isn't a hard line between those two. I can think of plenty of examples which sit between the extremes (spellcheck, proof-readers, collaborative projects, re-tellings of existing stories). LLMs are in this space. You could have an idea for the book and lay out notes and chapter outlines and more, and have the LLM bring it together. Did you write the book? Who can say? Investigate it hard enough and the question becomes meaningless.
People are using LLMs for the things they consider distractions but are “required”, or at least feel that way about: ads, marketing web sites, emails to/from coworkers, and even RFP responses to government agencies.
Wherever someone uses the raw output of an LLM signifies how little they wanted to do the work in the first place yet still [desperately] want to reap the benefits of appearing to care.
Yesterday, I was searching for local HVAC maintenance companies when I came across one with a map showing their service area.
At a quick glance, it seemed fine but that was no longer the case once you zoomed in: it was a collection of hallucinated, non-sensical names. I too said, “how in the world was this reviewed and approved!?”, and then quickly came to the same conclusion that you did: “nobody gives a shit about this stuff anymore”.
Think of what individuality can do with AI assistance. AI is like guns. It levels the playing field. Now it does not matter how much your marketing budget is. If you can use AI in a smart way that does not dilute your essence, then you got a better chance to shine, than before..hopefully...
Good places around here usually do actually care about presentation. None of these kebap/pizza places is particularly good either, it's the mass production places with average to bad ratings.
Whereas a field 5 miles off a major highway? I bet you could build a city, a better one, for half the cost.
The real reason you're postponing parenthood is probably that you choose to prioritize your comfort and financial independence at this moment. And there is nothing wrong with it, but I do miss honesty.
Poor kids.
[deleted]
In like five cities in the USA. I live in a top 10 city by population in the USA (so it's not "flyover"), and the median home price is 288–319, while median HHI is 89. That's easily in the recommended home loan range of 3*HHI.
Look, I'm sorry you can only be happy living in SV, but there's plenty of jobs in the boring parts of America, and the homes are affordable.
All that being said, homeownership is largely a scam, financially. Use your downpayment as a market investment and rent. You'll end up with more money when you retire, and as a bonus, you aren't tied to one geographic location if you lose your job.
The only reason apartments can even exist is because of economies of scale. If you have one rental property, it's virtually impossible to make money (certainly not in a way that outpaces index funds) because you don't have the economies of scale at your disposal.
I remember!
Who clicks on the clickbait? Who upvotes the garbage? Who actually sees ads and goes to buy what they didn't need? I think we all know.
The window we saw may have been one of an illusive sub-population who is forever on the treadmill trying to get away from the unwashed masses.
> They can't even use a computer, they struggle with basic computer knowledge because they grow up with closed ecosystems and most of them only have smartphones, not a desktop PC. They are called "Digital Naives" (sic) for a reason.
You and the GP are talking about totally different things.
Also the OP is talking about elementary schoolers. Even as a future software engineer interested in computers in the pre-smartphone era, my computer knowledge in elementary school was still pretty basic.
Try explaining a clutch and stick shift to kids. They will look at you and wonder why and how you think having a pedal that decouples the engine from the rest of the drivetrain so you can manually operate a gear lever was appropriate for a mass market product.
My son got caught trying to fix Windows installation on my wife work computer with bootable Linux Mint USB stick.
"Digital Naive," yes, of course.
That having been said, the new generation mostly does computing with a smartphone/tablet and these kids are very adept at handling them. If a child wants something, it'll find a way to make it happen and they're good at that. Creating spreadsheets and organizing files is simply not on their list. If it were, they'd be better at it than most people who grew up before computers.
Gives me some hope that the kids will be alright.
At least kids back then knew how to host their own TeamSpeak server ;) Clicking yourself a Discrd "server" is the easiest thing you can do.
It did appear to improve for a little while when everyone needed a laptop or desktop to access the Internet. But smartphones have eliminated that. So have tablets. And lightweight laptops like Chromebooks have further eliminated the need for tech knowledge. I work at a K-12 school, and a surprisingly large number of young parents have access to the Internet only through their smartphones. And, truthfully, they don't need a PC to access the Internet anymore. It's an extra cost you can just bypass, and nobody under 30 with kids has spare money at this point.
But, in as much as new teachers coming into our district today are often just as tech-illiterate as those we saw 20 years ago, we haven't seen the number of tech-savvy people really decreasing, either. Tech remains a hobby for some people, and that doesn't seem to be decreasing.
Yes, we're not going to raise another generation where the techies have a common background of making MS-DOS boot disks; reading modem initialization strings; upgrading RAM requiring a chip puller or piggybacking; managing IRQs, memory addresses, or bus addressing for ISA/IDE hardware with jumpers or DIP switches; or knowing what `LOAD"*",8,1` means. But that doesn't mean people aren't learning tech, having fun with it, or making careers out of it.
[dead]
I'm sure this is some kind of logical fallacy but: show me a kind not on TikTok/Reels/IG/brainrot that has a coherent argument against AI and I'll be interested in listening. Outside that it's all echo chambers on social media IMHO.
I learned lessons as a teenager on Twitter in 2012 that clearly none of the middle-aged people posting constantly on the company Slack ever internalized.
Our college library is having a surge of requests for new fiction.
I wonder if this is a combination of burnout and good old fashioned rebellion.
They're saying they have a better understanding of the impact of technology, not the specifics of using technology.
There’s still a massive disadvantage if you want a technical role and you think the Internet, Web and Wifi are all the same thing.
Directories and files as computing concepts are ~50 years old while the impact of the printing press is around ~600.
The aspects of computing you deem important may be lost to time within a century, while the "soft subject" of social impact will still be felt.
That’s like being GenX and saying millennials never learned to use a rotary phone.
People are taking your words to the literal meaning and miss the forest for the trees.
Kids aren't conditioned by society and are more in touch with their instinctual drives than adult people. They are much more keen to perceive that a piece of technology isn't "good" or "natural" or "desirable" without being able to form a reasoned argument. Any kid grown on an iPad is able to tell that it's an unnatural environment, and less preferable than growing up among and being cared by other humans.
It's a bit like that IQ curve meme, where the uneducated person (the children in this case) and genius agree that the modern world has gone too far, while the average adult self-indulgently defends our modern world, crying that we should be grateful to technology and if it weren't for it we would be dying of dysentery and we shouldn't resist AI but just learn to embrace it, yadda yadda.
I'd rather trust the instincts of a kid than the rationalizations of many adults, in this case.
In a way I am happy I left so much to the imagination for open interpretation.
I'm more and more convinced that young people (Gen Alpha is <17) have no idea what is good and right for the broader scope than themselves.
Do you really think young people around 14-16 understand the impact of doomscrolling & 15 sec videos on their brain capacities?
To put just one example.
Esp. the ones from the education group are, agains my expectation, very well educated and up-to-date regarding problems of all this stuff. So, yes. For sure, Im in a bubble and I do not know about people & their society outside of my bubble.
Yes, they do. Social media is, ironically, full of young Gen-Z rediscovering the joys of the analog world, saying they want to get off social media, looking into dumb phones. You don't see many "grown adults" talking about it. They're too far gone.
Regarding my two 12-year-old-twins, I have a different perspective and I clearly see that they need guidance, same with their folks in school.
i.e. it sucked. I learnt on Apple BASIC also, and I'm not sure I'd wish that experience on anyone. It was so bad you had to print out your code on a dot matrix printer to debug with a pen! Anything complex took forever to execute. I remember plotting the mandlebrot set in full screen resolution (192x192 or something! whoa, crazy times ...) with 100 max iter, and it was an overnight run!
Give me a linux box and today's HLLs any day. Learning to code, and learning to code well, is so much easier now. Any language you want is just a package manager command away, there are amazing and free IDEs, and everything is just a million times more conducive to coding than it ever was back in the 80s.
Anyway, I don’t want to pretend Apple BASIC was better than Python or whatever, but I never had to learn “no it’s venv now not virtualenv and make sure you’re not using system Python just install docker via brew and it will be easier…” until I was getting paid to deal with that nonsense.
Oh yea? give me the equalent of PLAY function. Or the PSET function to turn individual pixels on and off on the screen. Give me the function to read the color of any onscreen pixel (admittantly not QBASIC but some C variant)...
FFS you can't even draw something delayed on screen without having to deal with the setTimeout, setInterval madness. That alone would kill any interest that a kid might be starting out with!
What a terrible experience compared to a floppy disk! Sure disk failure was common and crushing, but the UX was simple and ubiquitous. I guess I could get him a thumb drive, but I don’t know if his school allows them.
True. Even as an adult it's tiring having to keep all my accounts sorted, and that's with a password manager.
There are a few websites that I can of off the top of my head that don't need an account or you can choose to log in through google/github: https://codepen.io, https://editor.p5js.org if that's of any use.
On a side note, in school I loved repl.it, supported ton of languages and worked despite all the blocks and filters on the school devices. Unfortunately, a few years ago they pivoted to I have no idea what, something to do with AI, but it's abysmal and such a loss. And I just found out glitch.com is also no longer a thing anymore either.
I am making a programming langauge and environment to address this. My target is to match the QBasic experience. A video screen capture of the old Paratrooper game running in the IDE..
Linux executable: https://sras.me/releases/spade.run
[dead]
It's been going since forever in this format, I've seen people complain about it here before but I don't really see the problem.
6yos don't only talk to other 6yos. They have older friends and family members.
And "That’s so slop" sounds awkward. But mostly I think the kids haven’t even heard of "AI slop" which isn’t really in the general lexicon, at least yet. That is, the prevalence of its use in these circles is a bubble effect. I doubt anybody ever uses it in kids' Tiktoks or Youtubes or whatever.
“Slopping the hogs” is probably where the modern negative interpretation comes from of forcing garbage onto someone.
I think our tendency to attribute "novel" word usage to 4chan might reflect more on us than on our language.
I'm a little short on primary reference material, but here's an example from 1917: https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/22692/pg22692-images.ht.... Conversation on language log has at least two others from 1897 and 1920 respectively.
[dead]
Yes they more rapidly synthesize new information, but they also lack the crystalized wisdom to apply judgement, cross domain expertise etc.
I'm saying that less intentional use has less artistic merit. AI hasn't made an impact on the toil involved in the creative process. It's instead another brush.
It all boils down to the fact that humans are not outsourcing anything to AI. If anything, it just raises the bar and makes humans have to work harder. Decision fatigue was already a problem long before this era of AI, and AI can make it worse.
That's exactly what happened to music with beat quantization and autotune. People just zoomed in, nerded out, got snobbier, stopped seeing the forest for the trees, and ultimately produced very boring music from exhaustion. Not only that, but a ton of nuance was lost. We took so much agency away from the performance and made it all march in line and in time. It's up to the audience where the breaking point is.
Exactly. AI generates imitations of the past. So does a paint brush at its fundamental.
With your personal agent, you can use it for everything YOU want to do and I can use mine for everything I want to do.
But we both log onto Amazon and are greeted by Rufus, a stranger that I’m sure most people have no interest in using.
And maybe shopping is a bad example, but AI is getting jammed into EVERYTHING and I’m sure that’s not the end result.
> But you ask people to pay even $1 for a track they will listen to hundreds of times? No thanks.
People used to buy albums or listen to the radio for free. If anything, paying Spotify means that quite a lot of people pay more then before for music ... however it is spotify who benefits rather then artists.
Just like with studios which used to have captured market and earn more then artists themselves.
Indeed, and we're now seeing similar hostility towards mathematicians, of all people. It's disgusting, honestly.
And maybe film is different in some respects, but AI does not allow musicians, artists, or writers to do anything they could not do already. The only benefit is churning out mediocre content faster.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puppy_(sculpture)
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jackson_and_Bubbles
etc.
Koons didn't write a two paragraph description of his ideas and then handed it over to a porcelain factory that repeatedly tried to come up with something that fit the spec until Koons cried out "Yes, that's it! That's what I had in mind!"
He drew sketches, built models, shaped prototypes, etc. He was an active participant in the creative process from the very start to the end, not just a client that checked in on what the artists were doing from time to time to give the thumbs up or thumbs down.
Pope Julius II did not paint the Sistine Chapel's ceilling. Michelangelo did. I cannot believe I have to say this.
But I think you know that and you're just straw manning.
edit- to be clear i'm talking about using existing software like logic pro, blender, etc. i'm not talking about generative AI.
Or, in other words, world is fine, will be fine and whatever comes societies will adapt. Don't have kids if you don't want to but llms shouldn't be the deciding factor. Think how late 1930s must have felt apocalyptically in Europe and rest of the world, yet we came through that stronger (and then got weaker but thats another story) and mankind goes on.
We don't need the ability to read. We need the ability to convey and understand -- audiobooks can do this, for example.
[dead]
Homes in the median are generally not viable unless you don't have a family or don't care about quality schools. In my city (90K), two houses that are identical but divided by the school district boundary between rank #1 and rank #265 out of 359 is a difference of $300K. One would be within the median and the other well above.
And let me be clear: ALL HOUSING IS A SCAM FINANCIALLY. Rent screws you one way and housing screws you another.
[deleted]
This isn't controversial. This is what anyone with finance expertise will tell you.
Also, if your down payments on mortgage are equal to rental fees, you won't save much renting, you just have better flexibility with moving, something great for single folks but families want opposite. In our case, for example we pay less mortgage than we would be paying in rental for same place (can check easily since symmetrical apartment next door is rented).
I don't want risky investments with potentially better returns for me, real estate is good enough.
Most people like putting down roots, knowing the town and people, having a local community, would like to have family and friends nearby.
Not everything is Silicon Valley stereotypes trying to feel special.
But will you be hired to do video editing on a tablet? REAL work like for a media company or movie studio? No. ipad skills are mostly irrelevant if your goal is to be employable. The advanced animations and workflows are not being done on tablets. Most people like being employable.
At least kids in the 90s learned how to use a desktop, which directly translated in some way to an office job.
They don't like slop when they're looking for non-slop and they recognise the slop, because it's not solving their problem. If they don't recognise the slop they'll just treat it as non-slop and use it, and in this case they arguably still liked it.
The fact you think that not a single one out of hundreds of millions of people has a genuine belief and that they all are just dumb kids being dumb because they're kids and following trends is staggering, I don't think any adult generation has ever had an opinion this extreme about their youth.
Anyway, here's this article[0] that was posted on the NYT about a week ago. It's not about AI, but many of the interviewed kids touch on its future downsides in ways that aren't just "AI bad cuz TikTok". And these kids are young, their worldviews aren't half as coherent as a 16 year old's. They were definitely pre-selected by the editors and probably aren't representative of the average kid, but they represent some of them. That's enough for your request of n=1.
Literally every adult generation has done this for time immemorial, just like the "kids these days" or "the next generation is screwed because X". I'm not saying no kid can have genuine belief nor was I saying that no kid has a coherent anti-AI argument _but_ this article is talking about slang, just because "that's ai" is slang and has negative connotation does not, for one second, mean that kids using that are actually anti-AI. It's slang, not a policy position.
People are reading way too much into that. In 1 year the slang will have moved on and will not be the basis for how they think about AI. Go look at the history of slang, it's not policy forming in the way it's being presented by some in this thread, that's the issue I have.
Just like when kids my age said "that's gay", that didn't mean they were all homophobic, it was slang. Some of those people grew up to be actual homophobes, some grew up to be gay, some grew up to allies. The same will happen here and none if it will be due to the year/months that it existed as slang.
Yes. Smoking and alcohol are less popular with young people than they've ever been. The social pressure and perception of smoking or even drinking as cool and rebellious have mostly vanished.
> I have a different perspective and I clearly see that they need guidance, same with their folks in school.
It depends, no one's saying that the 'aware of societal ills' position is even in the majority, but it is a considerable group, especially with the older ones. I see polarization where one group trends towards full brainrot and the other trends towards full disillusionment. Again, this is not the majority opinion, but it seems at least common enough.
What is a `ctx` and why do I need that? These are all hacks. Graphics programming in bolted on HTML in the form of canvas. It is a horrible platform for doing fun graphics programming when compared to qbasic.
>For delays, you define "sleep" (one line) and write "await sleep(500)" inside a loop, just like with "SLEEP" in QBASIC.
Kindly provide the code for this sleep function and tell me how a beginner who is trying draw some graphics on screen is supposed to figure that.
For sleep: const sleep = (ms) => new Promise(x => setTimeout(x, ms))
then you use like, for(;;) { console.log("hello"); await sleep(1000); }
The extra you get with this is the awesome dev tools. You can try it in this very page.
[dead]
So you're telling me that a word which has "slop" in its origins is itself the origin of "slop"?
This must be the first case of circular etymology!
You might object that those are really back-and-forth, but so is the claim being made here about slop. (I kind of doubt the claim though.)
I don't think your examples apply though. The dog example is just dog meaning sausage, sometimes with a temperature quality added (or ignored), but always a sausage with no other connotations.
The pepper one, maybe a little, though according to Etymonline [0] pep is short for pepper, so it's all the same really.
If just "being involved" in the "creative process" is enough to be called an artist, then by that measure that includes the guys that are simply involved by having the money to patron the process. Maybe it also includes the guy delivering the pizza.
Just selecting from a random sampling makes you a curator at best. You know where you want to go, but don't know how to do that. If luck is not in your favor, you will never arrive. And you're wholly dependent on luck to get there.
[deleted]
There is undoubtedly some performative element, how big that is who knows?
This is the kind of stuff which will just cause people to be contrarian and like it because we're told it's something to be embarrassed over. People put human-created content on way too high of a pedestal.
I find it interesting that we have tools which can take a general concept and sound and create hours and hours of content out of that and I don't consider it any different than remixing human stuff, it is still human at its core.
Honestly, for the people who hate this stuff, the best thing you can do is not to mock people in this way because I promise you, that's how you get contrarians. Do you know how rude it is to be told that what you like is legitimately embarrassing? What caused you to say that to another human being? Come on!
Maybe breathe and let your brain have some oxygen to think about the answer to your own question.
Wearing your second job uniform while working doesn't reveal a preference for blue jackets, it just means you'd like to not be fired.
using LLMs to learn for example is not the same as enjoying AI slop posters/art etc
If it makes you feel better, it can be rephrased as:
> Most of them are using AI for all their schoolwork while performatively hating it because "nobody likes AI slop" or some other half-understood meme
and how is it "half-understood"? it's simply not the same thing
Woke up this morning, I was feeling quite weird, Had flies in my beard, my toothpaste was smeared Over my window, they'd written my name, Said so long, we'll see you again ...
Did a vehicle, did a vehicle, did a vehicle come from somewhere out there, just to land in the Andes? Was it round and did it have a motor ...
Music was more interesting once.
Fleetwood Mac, 1975, "hypnotized" comes to mind. As does "Interstellar Overdrive" by Pink Floyd
So yeah. They did.
But what was the name of the song quoted in the comment you responded to?
Wasn't that also a song about UFOs and such and didn't that comment explicitly already acknowledge such songs existed?
hating AI slop overall like seeing it in shirts or something like that is not performative.
like with that logic, everybody loves AI and all the uses of it because they're not being specific enough in their speech
and even if you would hate AI, you don't really have a choice anymore since employers will expect you to be more productive due to it
but I definitely see a bunch of hate towards the dystopian aspects of it and as mentioned before, the whole slop thing and how you see AI slop everywhere now. it definitely evokes a very negative feeling in me when I see something like that
