petralithic

A human might generate a piece of media using AI (either via a slot machine spin or with more advanced workflows like ComfyUI) and once they deem it looks good enough for their purpose, they might display it to represent what they want it to represent. If Guernica was AI generated but still displayed by Picasso as a statement about war, it would still be art.

Tools do not dictate what art is and isn't, it is about the intent of the human using those tools. Image generators are not autonomously generating images, it is the human who is asking them for specific concepts and ideas. This is no different than performance art like a banana taped to a wall which requires no tools at all.

I've talked to people like this and when you dig deep enough, it's a fear of the economic effects of it, not actually any strongly held belief of AI inherently not being intelligent or emotional. Similarly, and I'm speaking generally here, ask artists about coding AI and they won't care, and ask programmers about media generation AI and they also won't care. That's because AI outside their domain does not (ostensibly) threaten their livelihood.

All this effort and it's just...Arial. I don't think anyone could see it on a page and guess that it were a different font.

Who is "we all?" Most people outside of HN don't care.

With uv you don't deal with any of that stuff though, it works as you describe.

Their sentiment and their phrasing ("it's almost as if... ") is a Reddit-level meme I see all the time on that site that's then blindly upvoted, so I don't think they're thinking of any country besides the US in particular when they say that.

Use uv, works very well.

Why would you compare it to Photoshop? If you compare it to other tools in the same category, of image generation, you will find models like Flux and Qwen do much better.

That is a vanishingly small percentage of the market that it is not worth catering to when the vast majority of such numbers are used for fraud rather than by users who want security and privacy.

My parents' generation also took photos but if something was off, they'd ask our photographer relative to edit them. This was over 20 years ago. At least some part of the population did know what photo editing was and did it, either themselves or with the help of someone else.

As always, there are some people with taste and most without. Just because the tools change does not mean one suddenly develops taste and creativity.

For example, I saw this the other day. Could it be better, sure, but it's at least interesting in itself.

https://www.reddit.com/r/aivideo/s/6EHgC29fvM

Are collages creative? What and is ones "own manner?" Does it require using one's bare hands, or do computers count? Does Photoshop count? There is nothing fundamentally different, 20 years ago people were harping over the Adobe suite too.

The way people are using gen AI is way more creative than typing in a prompt, and it is no different than electronic music producers, it's an arrangement of discrete elements they do not necessarily produce themselves.

Yeah but that's not everyone, is what I mean. Upper management is even a minority among everybody.

You're misunderstanding, Musk wants X to be the everything app in the US. He knows about WeChat, that is in fact where part of the inspiration came from, and more generally he talked about it during the PayPal days.

Sure but scenarios like those are a rounding error

That's pretty funny that this is novel for you, as it's very common in many countries.

The best part is it's very useful for getting rid of lots of smaller denomination coins, just dump them all in and the machine will give you the fewest number of coins back that equal the balance.

My point is that their "these days" example was already possible 20 to 30 years ago, so if they're just seeing these requests today then they're missing out on what people have wanted even back then.

Yes it'll still take time, and you will see more slop but there will always be a few gems in the slip that rise up.

Regarding "content," you might be interested in https://youtu.be/LRKeFRaYF-E

Survivorship bias, there is no indication that older movies were better on average. While I can agree that constraints breed creativity as they say, the opposite can also be true; look at software, one can also theoretically code an unlimited number of things, and from that we get people creating software and connecting devices to a never before seen level of scale and creativity.

At a sufficient level of scale, that is what they are though. Movie literally means moving pictures.

I'm specifically responding to their point about how "these days" people want different things and I'm saying that they always wanted those things, nothing new about it.

Yes, I agree, but I am specifically looking to understand the above photographer's point. They said the requests they used to get versus what they get today have changed, but I argue that that doesn't make any sense, people have always wanted to edit their photos in the "now" example even back then.

There are world models such as Genie [0] which show that they can be constrained to games too.

[0] https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/genie-3-a-new-frontier...

They don't have the mechanical means, yes, but they decide what to create so it'd be the latter, not sure why you think it's not; the AI isn't independently coming up with ideas and generating the media. Plus with ComfyUI, I'd say there's some of the former too, similar to how music producers aren't literally playing each instrument that's simulated in their software, but they do assemble it together.

One can be correct but convince no one, a modern day Cassandra.

Who is this "everyone" who thinks we "have to" use AI? From my experience it's very split with people on both sides.

It is just habitual and I feel it's making movies look terrible, especially panning shots look like a stuttery mess that is almost unwatchable for me at 24 FPS.

I'm not sure about this specific instance, but AI generated movies will absolutely be the future, when you can create the exact shots you want with stability of the foreground, background, and characters, and edit it all together, it'll be an explosion of creativity just as with image generation currently.

To be clear, I don't think it'll be telling an AI to "create me a movie with X, Y, and Z" because AI reasoning is not there yet, but for the raw video generation, it's progressing steadily, as seen in r/aivideo.

But people have be editing photos like that before AI and even before Photoshop, I don't see the big deal. What I've seen recently is synthesizing whole new pictures with AI, by training a LoRA on their face and body and asking the AI to create themselves with a specific setting or background.