3 ms·

I do appreciate that your post is genuinely trying to come from a good place, but I can’t say I agree with any of it. By that I don’t just mean the analysis of

I do appreciate that your post is genuinely trying to come from a good place, but I can’t say I agree with any of it. By that I don’t just mean the analysis of this specific submission but also your tangent points about AI. People have used tools to enable creativity for the entirety of human history. The definition of what tools are acceptable and which are cheating is a subjective one and often defined by the age of the person (ie what was the norm when you were in your 20s). I’ve seen the same debates time and time again. Whether it’s Ableton vs vinyl (DJs), search engines vs directory listings (research), internet vs books (research), VSTi’s vs instruments (musicians), automatic vs manual shift (cars), Photoshop vs traditional photography effects, CGI vs animatronics (movies), I could go on and on. Even dumb things like a central payment till in restaurants (eg McDonalds) was heavily criticised in the UK when it was new because the “correct” way to serve food was via table service…or so people over a certain age believed. Most people hate change. I know because I’m old myself and have seen enough change first hand and how people react to it. But change doesn’t make a compelling argument for why this 16 year old shouldn’t be helped in their endeavours to build an app. Nor is it proof that this individual isn’t who they claim to be.

Grimblewald 1y ago
I also appreciate where you're coming from and it's likely we wont agree, due to a difference in fundamental values (neither being better imo, just different), but i value the discourse and world view broadening that conversations like this offer no less. So let me preface this with the fact i value your input and think your point is not just valid, but true if i allow myself to evaluate all this under a different value system. that being said, even if i shift my values in this way, one problem remains - the nature of creativity. so, under this value system tool use is irrelevant, if it makes creativity easier cool, doesnt diminish it non. so lets evaluate this purely on a novelty / creativity angle. marketing wise: tactic / style taken from a youtuber they reference in their twitter account product: idea contributes jothing novel to a saturated space of ai learning tolls tool use: tools used, and the way they were used, is about as basic as it gets insight: no real novel or interesting insights into tool use, or the problem being solved wholisitc interpretation: all together, what appears novel in all this, is applying a particular marketing strategty to hn, one that is usually aimed at children. This raises a few interesting questions about shifting demogrpahics on hn among other things, but this post is interesting in a meta way, not a direct way. as an example, writing text like this, in a digital way, is not special anymore, by anyones reakoning - and yet if you apply this skill creatively, be it a story or poetry or solving a novel problem etc. Then that comment still has creative merit, even if the skills underlying it are no longer noteworthy. The same is true here, the skills underlying what was done are no longer noteworthy, and so we must evaluate on content alone. The content is derivative. So it stands on nothing.
- hnlmorg 1y ago
  When viewed from the context of looking for novel submissions on HN, I can definitely sympathise with your point of view here. I do also appreciate the patience and time you’ve taken to share your perspective too.

Grimblewald 1y ago

I also appreciate where you're coming from and it's likely we wont agree, due to a difference in fundamental values (neither being better imo, just different), but i value the discourse and world view broadening that conversations like this offer no less. So let me preface this with the fact i value your input and think your point is not just valid, but true if i allow myself to evaluate all this under a different value system. that being said, even if i shift my values in this way, one problem remains - the nature of creativity. so, under this value system tool use is irrelevant, if it makes creativity easier cool, doesnt diminish it non. so lets evaluate this purely on a novelty / creativity angle. marketing wise: tactic / style taken from a youtuber they reference in their twitter account product: idea contributes jothing novel to a saturated space of ai learning tolls tool use: tools used, and the way they were used, is about as basic as it gets insight: no real novel or interesting insights into tool use, or the problem being solved wholisitc interpretation: all together, what appears novel in all this, is applying a particular marketing strategty to hn, one that is usually aimed at children. This raises a few interesting questions about shifting demogrpahics on hn among other things, but this post is interesting in a meta way, not a direct way. as an example, writing text like this, in a digital way, is not special anymore, by anyones reakoning - and yet if you apply this skill creatively, be it a story or poetry or solving a novel problem etc. Then that comment still has creative merit, even if the skills underlying it are no longer noteworthy. The same is true here, the skills underlying what was done are no longer noteworthy, and so we must evaluate on content alone. The content is derivative. So it stands on nothing.

hnlmorg 1y ago
When viewed from the context of looking for novel submissions on HN, I can definitely sympathise with your point of view here. I do also appreciate the patience and time you’ve taken to share your perspective too.