Hacker News Reader

Comment by pavel_lishin | Hacker News Reader

I don't know if I agree. One of the big sources of income for online artists is commissions of D&D characters and such; AI-generated art is now getting good enough that people can get a "good-enough" version of what they want for free, instead of paying an artist $50 or $100 for a piece of art.

I've commissioned art for my D&D character before, and I'll almost certainly do so again - but if I'm playing a one-shot online and want a quick image to share with the group, AI-generated art is a fast and free way of getting that!

View on HN

People have been losing their jobs because of technology ever since the industrial revolution, each one of them enraged about it, and rightfully so. Society doesn't care about people who've put their whole lives into a skill that suddenly became worthless (or much less valuable then it was).

The solution is not to ban technology (you can't really ban technology, as it's not under total government control) - the solution is to enable anyone to pursue new skills without fear of homelessness and starvation. I.e. Universal Basic Income.

> the solution is to enable anyone to pursue new skills without fear of homelessness and starvation. I.e. Universal Basic Income.

Sure but good luck getting that to happen. The same level automation has already happened for agriculture and I still have to buy my groceries.

i mean what is even the point of pursuing a new skill if you can't create things anymore because the act of creation and craftsmanship have been so thoroughly devalued in favor of cheap volume? what kind of fucking joyless bugworld is that?

Plenty of craftsman have good careers. We have a cabinet maker in town that is busy charging double the other cabinet makers. Those other cabinet makers charge double what a crew will install from Home Depot. All of them are busy.

>The people or organizations to which AI-churned art appeals to most desire commercial visual churn. They are the same people who would in any case have least cared about art in its more creative, communicative forms.

I specifically addressed this in my original post. You're exactly the kind of person who would possibly like this AI technology, and apparently not someone who would have an appreciation for art in its artistic, emotionally appealing form. Your disagreement is based on a misunderstanding of definitions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com