8 ms·

Mostly unrelated, but I dislike how normalized AI art is.

ancarda 1y ago
I don't think it's unrelated at all. I saw the same picture and just closed the tab right away. Why should I read this article, the whole thing might be written by an LLM.
- naikrovek 1y ago
  I think adding a AI image to filter out readers who think that way might have been intentional. I certainly consider it a good idea, now that it has come to mind.
  - archerx 1y ago
    The neo-Luddite filter
  - LastTrain 1y ago
    Could you also tag it “AI enhanced” or some such for us as well? Thanks.
    - naikrovek 1y ago
      nope. i don't use AI to write anything. I will just put an obviously AI image in the article to give those who make assumptions a reason to bail. and it will work very well.
      - LastTrain 1y ago
        What’s wrong with using AI to write something?
- navane 1y ago
  If anything, the ubiquity of style he used makes it into a deliberate meme. It's a little joke.
mapcars 1y ago
Dislike it or not, its normalised as is everything else that is useful.
- layer8 1y ago
  It’s not really useful in most instances.
- csomar 1y ago
  Useful? I concur with a sibling comment. I stopped reading and closed the article as soon as I saw it.
  - Melonai 1y ago
    This happened to me too (almost subconsciously I might add). I'm actually not anti-AI at all, maybe a bit uninterested in AI-made art, since I don't fully see much use for it except for generating fun pictures of Golden Retriever dogs in silly situations, but this imitation-Ghibli art style is probably one of the least pleasing things to my eye that people love making. It's so round and without edge, it's colors are washed out in a very non-offensive way, and also it does not even look like the source material. I wouldn't be so aggrieved by it, I think, if there wasn't that wave where everyone and their dog was making pictures in that style. Sorry, just a small rant tangentially related to the article, which is fine. :)
tudorizer 1y ago
same. Would have prefered a lo-fi stick figure drawn on a napkin. The cartoon Max detracts from the rest of article, which is a good read.
riskable 1y ago
Your comment reminds me of people complaining about how using emoji in communications/text has become normalized. Generating images with AI is pretty fun and seems like an appropriate thing to do for a personal blog. As in, this is the exact sort of place where it's most appropriate. It's not like this person was ever going to pay someone to make a cartoon drawing so nobody lost their livelihood over it. Seems like a harmless visual identifier (that helps you remember if you read the article if you stumble across it again later). Is it really such a bad thing when people use generative AI for fun or for their hobbies? This isn't the New York Times.

I don't think it's unrelated at all. I saw the same picture and just closed the tab right away. Why should I read this article, the whole thing might be written by an LLM.

naikrovek 1y ago
I think adding a AI image to filter out readers who think that way might have been intentional. I certainly consider it a good idea, now that it has come to mind.
- archerx 1y ago
  The neo-Luddite filter
- LastTrain 1y ago
  Could you also tag it “AI enhanced” or some such for us as well? Thanks.
  - naikrovek 1y ago
    nope. i don't use AI to write anything. I will just put an obviously AI image in the article to give those who make assumptions a reason to bail. and it will work very well.
    - LastTrain 1y ago
      What’s wrong with using AI to write something?
navane 1y ago
If anything, the ubiquity of style he used makes it into a deliberate meme. It's a little joke.

mapcars 1y ago

Dislike it or not, its normalised as is everything else that is useful.

layer8 1y ago
It’s not really useful in most instances.
csomar 1y ago
Useful? I concur with a sibling comment. I stopped reading and closed the article as soon as I saw it.
- Melonai 1y ago
  This happened to me too (almost subconsciously I might add). I'm actually not anti-AI at all, maybe a bit uninterested in AI-made art, since I don't fully see much use for it except for generating fun pictures of Golden Retriever dogs in silly situations, but this imitation-Ghibli art style is probably one of the least pleasing things to my eye that people love making. It's so round and without edge, it's colors are washed out in a very non-offensive way, and also it does not even look like the source material. I wouldn't be so aggrieved by it, I think, if there wasn't that wave where everyone and their dog was making pictures in that style. Sorry, just a small rant tangentially related to the article, which is fine. :)

tudorizer 1y ago

same. Would have prefered a lo-fi stick figure drawn on a napkin. The cartoon Max detracts from the rest of article, which is a good read.

riskable 1y ago

Your comment reminds me of people complaining about how using emoji in communications/text has become normalized. Generating images with AI is pretty fun and seems like an appropriate thing to do for a personal blog. As in, this is the exact sort of place where it's most appropriate. It's not like this person was ever going to pay someone to make a cartoon drawing so nobody lost their livelihood over it. Seems like a harmless visual identifier (that helps you remember if you read the article if you stumble across it again later). Is it really such a bad thing when people use generative AI for fun or for their hobbies? This isn't the New York Times.