10 ms·
“ I asked ChatGPT to render an image of Gomory and Knuth pensively sitting atop a mainframe. It refused for privacy reasons. Here is the best it could do:” Why
by hyperhello 2y ago
“ I asked ChatGPT to render an image of Gomory and Knuth pensively sitting atop a mainframe. It refused for privacy reasons. Here is the best it could do:”
Why? This took me right out of the article. No one needs this energy.
- chx 2y agoCompletely agreed. Instantly closed the tab without looking at the article when I saw the distinctly AI rendered image.
- awesomerob 2y agoShame, if you'd kept reading you would've been enlightened by the author's shocking discovery that modern computers can solve problems orders of magnitude faster than computers from the 60s or 90s. Just mind-blowing stuff, who'da think it
- jgalt212 2y agoreally? I find AI art perhaps the only non-obnoxious use case.
- lxgr 2y agoI find the idea of “AI art” ok, but something about Dall-E 3 specifically just riles me up. It seems like OpenAI went out of their way to make everything generated look a certain way, while that’s clearly not a limitation of GANs in general. It makes every single blog look like they have the same illustrator, which I really dislike.
- robertlagrant 2y agoSo many non-AI article illustrations are just Alegria anyway.
- jgalt212 2y agoI call it Corporate Memphis 2.0
- falcor84 2y agoI don't know if anyone "needs" this energy, but I liked it. Just as I did when I was 6, I enjoy having illustrations when I'm reading, and am generally ok with them being AI-generated; it's better than using random stock photos.
- sedatk 2y agoAI generated imagery is usually imbued with inaccuracies and errors. Not to mention the ethical problems of using artwork without consent for training the AI. So, it might be worse than a random stock photo in those aspects.
- glimshe 2y agoI'll let the courts decide the legality of the artwork, I can't myself see any ethical problems. I agree with the parent that an AI-generated image is a lot better than a stock one and enhances the material as long as a human is able to validate that the image is appropriate for the context. In this case, I'm glad that the image was included. I was about to close the tab but the image caught my attention, and I kept going.
- chx 2y agoI do not trust the corrupt courts of the United States to decide on anything. Or, more charitably even if the blatant exploitation of artists can't be proven to breach any existing statute -- and the law is always behind -- even then I will shorten this obvious truism as "all AI art is stolen art".
- FeepingCreature 2y agoWhy not go one step further? All art is stolen art.
- thfuran 2y agoBecause that makes no damn sense.
- wslh 2y agoIt worked for me. Trying to share it here but there is an issue with the share API. Will reply to this message or edit it once the sharing is working.
- mateus1 2y agoWhat bothers me about this use case is that AI will generate the most generic middle-of-the-road illustration that adds no insight or value to the prompt. I’d get a better kick if he just wrote a description like “I can only imagine them debugging this while sitting beside a room-sized mainframe with a plethora of wires and bulbs”
- dang 2y ago"Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html