Hacker News Reader

Comment by bcjdjsndon | Hacker News Reader

If you can't even tell it's AI and need to be told... then what's the problem? Personal preference? It's like only enjoying paintings if the artist used horse hair and horse hair alone for their paintbrush.... A very arbitrary constraint

View on HN

You really underestimate the LOTR fandom if you think they can't tell that the map is wrong.

Which part of the map is incorrect? It matches the other ones I can find.

https://www.moleskine.com/en-us/shop/limited-editions/the-lo...

That's not the AI picture. Or at least not the admitted one. Click the OP link.

So just the maps in the background of AI generated ads? The AI generated one that shows a staged notebook seems to have the same map features as the one on the page I linked and that one seemed to match up with the locations shown on other non-AI maps of Middle Earth even though it uses a different drawing style.

Look at the names on the map. You don't need to be a LOTR superfan to tell something is off.

So it's not actually about AI at all? It's about it being incorrect?

It’s about humans presenting something plausibly awful in a deceptive way, and using a machine to be plausible and deceptive.

It's incorrect because it was lazily AI-generated. Most modern AI image generators can handle this if you're the least bit thoughtful.

The telly tale flip flopping of someone driven by emotion not logic

It's not flip-flopping, they're answering the question that you posed. You claimed that the constraint is arbitrary, they demonstrated how it isn't.

I even made a better map in a few minutes to prove the point: https://bsky.app/profile/kyefox.com/post/3mkibnvrt3c25

There are still inaccuracies, but I'm also not pretending to care about legacy like Moleskine.

If I forged a Picasso and convinced someone to buy it, did I do anything wrong?

What's that got to do with llms?

Because the existing cultural understanding of art is that someone took the time to create what you’re experiencing. AI generated “art” subverts that expectation. It feels deceptive. Honestly it reminds of Duchamp’s Fountain and similar works, which some people hated for more or less the same reason.

I am not equating AI slop with Marcel Duchamp, however. His work and what he did was very much intentional to evoke the sort of reactions it did.

You could even say that AI generated art is an experience that artists chose to not create.

Moleskin is selling notebooks, not art. They happen to come with graphical elements, but I don't see them claiming those are art. So where is the deception?

I’m speaking about negative reactions toward AI created imagery.

> Moleskin is selling notebooks

When I need a notebook, I just go into a store that sells them and grab whatever they have. I have a notebook for logging my exercises and another one for random stuff, I have no idea what brand they are.

Moleskin sells fashion items. Or, maybe, an idea of a certain lifestyle. I'm not sure.

> Moleskin is selling notebooks, not art. They happen to come with graphical elements, but I don't see them claiming those are art. So where is the deception?

Come on, they're selling notebooks with art on them. Cheap, AI-generated art, passed off as premium.

>Because the existing cultural understanding of art is that someone took the time to create what you’re experiencing. AI generated “art” subverts that expectation

And? I don't care. Is the art good or not? I'm not searching for someone to admire, I just want good music

The AI art debate reminds me a bit of the blowback from Miles Davis, a famous at the time jazz musician, recording Sketches of Spain, which is not jazz.

His response was "it's music, and I like it".

Some of those pictures? I like them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com