> In this specific case it’s a little funny, just because the author is a photographer. Literally all of their criticisms (other than “it looks bad”, which is o

> In this specific case it’s a little funny, just because the author is a photographer. Literally all of their criticisms (other than “it looks bad”, which is obviously both ephemeral and subjective) were leveled against photography mere decades ago Indeed, and if you read the post fully and watch the linked presentation you would understand I have no problem with generative AI nor LLMs. My 20 minute talk goes into much more detail about this. The history of photography is littered with examples of the criticisms that are being directed towards this space. Photography is built on manipulation, lies, half truths, misdirection, fake narrative to fit the use case, memory loss, and so on. The problem I have in this space is the lack of competence. Both in the tools and in those using them. "This looks fine", or "this reads fine", or "this works fine" is a race to the bottom.