4 ms·

I'm genuinely interested to hear more about this. I really like most of the AI images (see post below), but it was subtle pressure from other people saying what

I'm genuinely interested to hear more about this. I really like most of the AI images (see post below), but it was subtle pressure from other people saying what you are saying that changed my mind. After putting a lot of effort into authentic writing, sometimes with in-depth research, does it really cheapen it to have an obvious AI thumbnail? I guess the signals are quite sublime. Does it say "trying too hard"?

rurp 2y ago
A generic AI image generated from a simple prompt is kind of the opposite of a deeply researched and well written article. Throwing the two together is incongruous. It doesn't personally bother me as much as some, but I certainly don't think they add anything to the article. At least the images are easy to scroll past. Useless AI features that actively get in the way of real functionality are much more off-puttting to me.
- nonrandomstring 2y ago
  Thanks. Where I think I went wrong with it was to say; I'm a writer not a visual artist. I can do a bit of creative photoshopping but it's not really my talent. So why not use the tools available? That will free me up to spend more time on the bit I'm good at. It seems logical but it ignores a holistic aesthetic that, as you say, is incongruous. A good AI image is worse for the overall product than an authentic but awful bit of amateur art, or even a hastily chosen stock image.
  - xigoi 2y ago
    If an image is not crucial to conveying the information, why add one at all?
    - nonrandomstring 2y ago
      Indexing and human search. A visual aide-memoire is more for the thumbnails to help users browse old posts.
- tivert 2y ago
  > A generic AI image generated from a simple prompt is kind of the opposite of a deeply researched and well written article. Throwing the two together is incongruous. It doesn't personally bother me as much as some, but I certainly don't think they add anything to the article. I also hate them because when one of those images catches my eye, I feel like I've been scammed. It's like biting into a delicious-looking chocolate bar that's filled with ash instead of caramel and peanuts you reasonably expected. After enough of that, you'll even sensibly get wary of real chocolate bars.
xk_id 2y ago
There is the aspect of how AI works (unoriginal plagiarism, unconsentual data harvesting, intractable confabulation). On top of that there is the aspect of AI marketing (companies trying to fabricate demand for it, by gaslighting users into thinking AI is a breakthrough). And then there is the complex, emergent aspect of social affiliation: similar people choosing to segregate themselves based on the personal connotations that the previous aspects have for them. An author who chooses AI in this context doesn’t just accept the issues with the tech, doesn’t just entertain the marketing messaging, but also aligns with a specific sub-culture and with its values and norms. I personally found myself “vibing” more with the group of people who denounce AI. I hope that gives you at least a slightly interesting angle on it? Your other post is very spot on and the fact that you reflected on it gives you huge credit.
- nonrandomstring 2y ago
  Cheers. I totally hear you about the undercurrents of subcultures. My thought was... as a computer/techie person, I have to try this and get with the programme. And to be honest I love much of what generative technology can do, and glad that I used it to find out. But I'm amazed how quickly I tired of it. But while those deeper reflections on what and who I am aligning myself with are very important I ultimately caved to perceptions in a cowardly way rather than take a deeply principled stand. Still, it was one of those "Are We the Baddies?" moments noticing the skulls on our hats... :)
pushfoo 2y ago
Do you remember WordArt[1]? > does it really cheapen it to have an obvious AI thumbnail? > Does it say "trying too hard"? If the article isn't about AI images, they often signal one more of the things WordArt used to: 1. Cluelessness (using $HOT_NEW_THING out of FOMO) 2. Sales pitches (trying to sell you something) 3. Irrelevance (lead-ins for B2B sales to 1 and 2) 4. Hard social & technical problems The last case is the worst: 1. They're about to discuss font rendering problems 2. Consider leaving before someone assigns you the ticket(s) for them[2] [1]: https://filestore.community.support.microsoft.com/api/images/88d890fc-600f-4b43-8879-236670fcdaae https://filestore.community.support.microsoft.com/api/images... [2]: https://faultlore.com/blah/text-hates-you/ https://faultlore.com/blah/text-hates-you/

rurp 2y ago

A generic AI image generated from a simple prompt is kind of the opposite of a deeply researched and well written article. Throwing the two together is incongruous. It doesn't personally bother me as much as some, but I certainly don't think they add anything to the article. At least the images are easy to scroll past. Useless AI features that actively get in the way of real functionality are much more off-puttting to me.

nonrandomstring 2y ago
Thanks. Where I think I went wrong with it was to say; I'm a writer not a visual artist. I can do a bit of creative photoshopping but it's not really my talent. So why not use the tools available? That will free me up to spend more time on the bit I'm good at. It seems logical but it ignores a holistic aesthetic that, as you say, is incongruous. A good AI image is worse for the overall product than an authentic but awful bit of amateur art, or even a hastily chosen stock image.
- xigoi 2y ago
  If an image is not crucial to conveying the information, why add one at all?
  - nonrandomstring 2y ago
    Indexing and human search. A visual aide-memoire is more for the thumbnails to help users browse old posts.
tivert 2y ago
> A generic AI image generated from a simple prompt is kind of the opposite of a deeply researched and well written article. Throwing the two together is incongruous. It doesn't personally bother me as much as some, but I certainly don't think they add anything to the article. I also hate them because when one of those images catches my eye, I feel like I've been scammed. It's like biting into a delicious-looking chocolate bar that's filled with ash instead of caramel and peanuts you reasonably expected. After enough of that, you'll even sensibly get wary of real chocolate bars.

xk_id 2y ago

There is the aspect of how AI works (unoriginal plagiarism, unconsentual data harvesting, intractable confabulation). On top of that there is the aspect of AI marketing (companies trying to fabricate demand for it, by gaslighting users into thinking AI is a breakthrough). And then there is the complex, emergent aspect of social affiliation: similar people choosing to segregate themselves based on the personal connotations that the previous aspects have for them. An author who chooses AI in this context doesn’t just accept the issues with the tech, doesn’t just entertain the marketing messaging, but also aligns with a specific sub-culture and with its values and norms. I personally found myself “vibing” more with the group of people who denounce AI. I hope that gives you at least a slightly interesting angle on it? Your other post is very spot on and the fact that you reflected on it gives you huge credit.

nonrandomstring 2y ago
Cheers. I totally hear you about the undercurrents of subcultures. My thought was... as a computer/techie person, I have to try this and get with the programme. And to be honest I love much of what generative technology can do, and glad that I used it to find out. But I'm amazed how quickly I tired of it. But while those deeper reflections on what and who I am aligning myself with are very important I ultimately caved to perceptions in a cowardly way rather than take a deeply principled stand. Still, it was one of those "Are We the Baddies?" moments noticing the skulls on our hats... :)

pushfoo 2y ago

Do you remember WordArt[1]? > does it really cheapen it to have an obvious AI thumbnail? > Does it say "trying too hard"? If the article isn't about AI images, they often signal one more of the things WordArt used to: 1. Cluelessness (using $HOT_NEW_THING out of FOMO) 2. Sales pitches (trying to sell you something) 3. Irrelevance (lead-ins for B2B sales to 1 and 2) 4. Hard social & technical problems The last case is the worst: 1. They're about to discuss font rendering problems 2. Consider leaving before someone assigns you the ticket(s) for them[2] [1]: https://filestore.community.support.microsoft.com/api/images/88d890fc-600f-4b43-8879-236670fcdaae https://filestore.community.support.microsoft.com/api/images... [2]: https://faultlore.com/blah/text-hates-you/ https://faultlore.com/blah/text-hates-you/