3 ms·

I like the blog but the premise of the blog is an engineering/epistemological perspective on the craft. The writer clearly cares more about the process, techniq

I like the blog but the premise of the blog is an engineering/epistemological perspective on the craft. The writer clearly cares more about the process, technique and history more than the feeling and validation. It could be, that a big part of the the future of hobby's and entertainment in this way is the feeling and validation over the actual performance. Or it can be that a massive amount of people find their value in this content.

ossopite 5mo ago
The idea that we could create a world where 'a big part of the future of hobbies and entertainment' is people listening to meaningless words made up by machines that help them feel good about themselves sounds horrifying. How could anybody feel ok about that? What would it say about the society we've built?
- augment_me 5mo ago
  It would say that society changes, and people who were not used to a new world get upset about it, as it has always been throughout the entire history of humanity. We were used to having psychologists and doctors in person, now the most common form is to have it through apps, and the younger generation does not care, it's in fact more efficient to get a prescription that you like than to spend time going places and having in-person meetings. But older generation finds it hollowing out and horrifying. You need to accept that society moves on, and it can look different from your perspective.
  - danparsonson 5mo ago
    You could justify basically anything with that logic. Change isn't always about progress.
    - augment_me 5mo ago
      In this case, the user is deciding that they choose what progress is. I am saying, that people who use the tool and value the utility of it decide what is progress. If people listen to the podcast, or use doctors in the phone because it provides them any value, it will be a change and a perceived progress for them. If the generated podcasts did not bring any value to the users, such as validation, or engagement, they would not use them, and there would be no change.
      - like_any_other 5mo ago
        "But how does the collapse of truth and meaning in society affect you personally?" https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2565163-smugjak-but-how-does-this-affect-you-personally https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2565163-smugjak-but-how-does...
        augment_me 5mo ago
        Your meaning and your truth, not necessarily other peoples who find their meaning and truth in other things. Go to China, or Congo and you will find that the public might hold a different version of some truths than you do. We had religions dominating the world order for thousands of years, which projected their versions of the truth onto their societies. If we would extrapolate that to today and to your opinion, it would be that everyone in the middle ages actually had it all figured out, they knew that the religious texts about splitting oceans or the moon were fake, and were all just playing along with it for the social structure. Maybe it just happens that the LLM-generated stuff is the next thing in this iteration.
        like_any_other 5mo ago
        > Your meaning and your truth, not necessarily other peoples who find their meaning and truth in other things. The makers of those AI podcasts explicitly stated they were unconcerned with whether their content was factual, so this is not comparable to people that actually thought they were right. But if you're arguing that listeners of those podcasts will believe that made-up slop is truth, that that's the "their truth" you're talking about, then yes, that is exactly what I meant by "collapse of truth".
  - simonask 5mo ago
    A looooot of assumptions here. We have yet to see any of these brave new ideas actually work. Therapy has never been more available, yet mental health is through the basement. I’m also not seeing any evidence that young people are the driving force behind turning the world to shit. Every Gen Z person I know craves authenticity, connection, and meaningful work. All of this is the opposite.
    - augment_me 5mo ago
      It's interesting how every time this argument is made, its about subjective experiences of 'craving'. If this was the objective reality, we would have a majority of Gen Z engaged in movements, social groups and other concepts that would help them fulfill their 'cravings'. However, it seems to not be the case, it seems like they prefer to spend their free time to doomscroll, or sit at home, and engage more in parasocial relationships that perhaps can be more on their terms, on their timeframes, and with their opinions.
      - simonask 5mo ago
        That’s one explanation. The other explanation is that young people feel powerless to change anything, and that they are hooked against their will on deliberately addictive ad delivery platforms. The more alarming conclusion here happens to be backed by a lot of science, unfortunately, so it’s not easy to dismiss.
  - doesnt_know 5mo ago
    The problem is, who is moving “society on” and what is their agenda. I don’t think it’s healthy to encourage an attitude to just accept all change without any sort of reflection or push back.
  - genewitch 5mo ago
    > the younger generation does not care, [...] more efficient to get a prescription that you like [through apps] Absolutely > people listening to meaningless words made up by machines that help them feel good about themselves sounds horrifying Yes > Every ... person ... craves authenticity, connection, and meaningful work. Right > to find a means of inserting a wire in your head that provides constant pleasant sensations. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1955-06866-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1955-06866-001 > Factual, grounded information is just one take. Absolutely
pjc50 5mo ago
So .. I think we need to ask a deceptively simple question here, which is: is knitting real? I'll add in an aside to this, which is not only are there fake knitting podcasts there are fake knitting and crochet patterns, which is a problem because people get a substantial way through making them only to discover that they don't work. In some cases the giveaway is that the supposed final image isn't physically possible, like the images in this article, but the fakers can use a real stolen image and just spam a pattern underneath it. So: what is the knitting that is real? It has to be the use of your hands, needles, and yarn to produce a physical object, right? The podcasts work towards something else. The identity of "being a knitter". This is a form of "hobby" that was already not unusual, that of discussing a thing without ever bothering to actually do it. Photographers are especially bad at this: too many lenses, not enough photographs. They've also got comprehensively run over by AI, because you can just generate the photographs now. Same for "authors". But ultimately all these pleasant sensations aren't backed by a connection to the real. If you're going to talk about the history of knitting, shouldn't it be the real, evidenced history? As done by real (usually) women? Otherwise you're just knitting a pleasant fantasy for yourself. The AI approach is "wireheading": the logical conclusion of all of that would be to find a means of inserting a wire in your head that provides constant pleasant sensations. Achieving happiness through a constant feed of generated images is less effective, but it's the same order of things. (see also: authenticity in food, which could easily turn into another ten thousand words)
- augment_me 5mo ago
  I am with you until you make this assumption: > But ultimately all these pleasant sensations aren't backed by a connection to the real. If you're going to talk about the history of knitting, shouldn't it be the real, evidenced history? As done by real (usually) women? Otherwise you're just knitting a pleasant fantasy for yourself. If the real is the feeling you get from listening to the podcast or identifying with a subculture, then that is the real for that person. Factual, grounded information is just one take. If it was not this way, we would have much less myths, religions, etc historically. People will feel the same degree of joy and completion when the final word of the podcast is read like you feel when you finish a really complex piece of work.
ratmice 5mo ago
Can't wear feelings and validation...
- augment_me 5mo ago
  If you only care about the material and physical utility of the product, you can order the sweater from AliExpress for 5% of the cost and no time spent.
  - ratmice 5mo ago
    Seriously? You can't get the feeling of satisfaction of wearing something, or having someone wear something you made from AliExpress. My point is your sense of feeling and validation is extremely distorted if you have no knitted material to show for it?
    - augment_me 5mo ago
      Completely subjective take by you with similar epistemology around value as the blog author. People might not care. I might identify as a runner because I bought a little jacket, expensive shoes, and wide-purple-tinted sunglasses, do I have to run? Not necessarily if the objects and my identity gives me the feeling of completion and satisfaction. If your premise was true for all people, and the sense would be distorted, we would not see these phenomena, and people wouldn't listen or engage with AI-content. But the biological reality and the path of least resistance seems to prove us otherwise.
  - nephihaha 5mo ago
    Knitting is enjoyable for many people and can even be a form of stress relief. AliExpress is just more consumption.
    - augment_me 5mo ago
      The same way that the AI generated podcast about knitting, or engaging in consumption is enjoyable for many people and a form of stress relief, which was the point that the comment above was criticizing. So the conclusion is that the utility of the activity is subjective, and if most people spend their time listening to AI factually incorrect podcasts about knitting and enjoying it, it's no different than knitting yourself and enjoying it. The blog was poor in this disambiguation, and pushed a more Aristotole-like ontological view of what is meaningful, which is more common view in engineering/hard-science dominated fields.

ossopite 5mo ago

The idea that we could create a world where 'a big part of the future of hobbies and entertainment' is people listening to meaningless words made up by machines that help them feel good about themselves sounds horrifying. How could anybody feel ok about that? What would it say about the society we've built?

augment_me 5mo ago
It would say that society changes, and people who were not used to a new world get upset about it, as it has always been throughout the entire history of humanity. We were used to having psychologists and doctors in person, now the most common form is to have it through apps, and the younger generation does not care, it's in fact more efficient to get a prescription that you like than to spend time going places and having in-person meetings. But older generation finds it hollowing out and horrifying. You need to accept that society moves on, and it can look different from your perspective.
- danparsonson 5mo ago
  You could justify basically anything with that logic. Change isn't always about progress.
  - augment_me 5mo ago
    In this case, the user is deciding that they choose what progress is. I am saying, that people who use the tool and value the utility of it decide what is progress. If people listen to the podcast, or use doctors in the phone because it provides them any value, it will be a change and a perceived progress for them. If the generated podcasts did not bring any value to the users, such as validation, or engagement, they would not use them, and there would be no change.
    - like_any_other 5mo ago
      "But how does the collapse of truth and meaning in society affect you personally?" https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2565163-smugjak-but-how-does-this-affect-you-personally https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2565163-smugjak-but-how-does...
      - augment_me 5mo ago
        Your meaning and your truth, not necessarily other peoples who find their meaning and truth in other things. Go to China, or Congo and you will find that the public might hold a different version of some truths than you do. We had religions dominating the world order for thousands of years, which projected their versions of the truth onto their societies. If we would extrapolate that to today and to your opinion, it would be that everyone in the middle ages actually had it all figured out, they knew that the religious texts about splitting oceans or the moon were fake, and were all just playing along with it for the social structure. Maybe it just happens that the LLM-generated stuff is the next thing in this iteration.
        like_any_other 5mo ago
        > Your meaning and your truth, not necessarily other peoples who find their meaning and truth in other things. The makers of those AI podcasts explicitly stated they were unconcerned with whether their content was factual, so this is not comparable to people that actually thought they were right. But if you're arguing that listeners of those podcasts will believe that made-up slop is truth, that that's the "their truth" you're talking about, then yes, that is exactly what I meant by "collapse of truth".
- simonask 5mo ago
  A looooot of assumptions here. We have yet to see any of these brave new ideas actually work. Therapy has never been more available, yet mental health is through the basement. I’m also not seeing any evidence that young people are the driving force behind turning the world to shit. Every Gen Z person I know craves authenticity, connection, and meaningful work. All of this is the opposite.
  - augment_me 5mo ago
    It's interesting how every time this argument is made, its about subjective experiences of 'craving'. If this was the objective reality, we would have a majority of Gen Z engaged in movements, social groups and other concepts that would help them fulfill their 'cravings'. However, it seems to not be the case, it seems like they prefer to spend their free time to doomscroll, or sit at home, and engage more in parasocial relationships that perhaps can be more on their terms, on their timeframes, and with their opinions.
    - simonask 5mo ago
      That’s one explanation. The other explanation is that young people feel powerless to change anything, and that they are hooked against their will on deliberately addictive ad delivery platforms. The more alarming conclusion here happens to be backed by a lot of science, unfortunately, so it’s not easy to dismiss.
- doesnt_know 5mo ago
  The problem is, who is moving “society on” and what is their agenda. I don’t think it’s healthy to encourage an attitude to just accept all change without any sort of reflection or push back.
- genewitch 5mo ago
  > the younger generation does not care, [...] more efficient to get a prescription that you like [through apps] Absolutely > people listening to meaningless words made up by machines that help them feel good about themselves sounds horrifying Yes > Every ... person ... craves authenticity, connection, and meaningful work. Right > to find a means of inserting a wire in your head that provides constant pleasant sensations. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1955-06866-001 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1955-06866-001 > Factual, grounded information is just one take. Absolutely

pjc50 5mo ago

So .. I think we need to ask a deceptively simple question here, which is: is knitting real? I'll add in an aside to this, which is not only are there fake knitting podcasts there are fake knitting and crochet patterns, which is a problem because people get a substantial way through making them only to discover that they don't work. In some cases the giveaway is that the supposed final image isn't physically possible, like the images in this article, but the fakers can use a real stolen image and just spam a pattern underneath it. So: what is the knitting that is real? It has to be the use of your hands, needles, and yarn to produce a physical object, right? The podcasts work towards something else. The identity of "being a knitter". This is a form of "hobby" that was already not unusual, that of discussing a thing without ever bothering to actually do it. Photographers are especially bad at this: too many lenses, not enough photographs. They've also got comprehensively run over by AI, because you can just generate the photographs now. Same for "authors". But ultimately all these pleasant sensations aren't backed by a connection to the real. If you're going to talk about the history of knitting, shouldn't it be the real, evidenced history? As done by real (usually) women? Otherwise you're just knitting a pleasant fantasy for yourself. The AI approach is "wireheading": the logical conclusion of all of that would be to find a means of inserting a wire in your head that provides constant pleasant sensations. Achieving happiness through a constant feed of generated images is less effective, but it's the same order of things. (see also: authenticity in food, which could easily turn into another ten thousand words)

augment_me 5mo ago
I am with you until you make this assumption: > But ultimately all these pleasant sensations aren't backed by a connection to the real. If you're going to talk about the history of knitting, shouldn't it be the real, evidenced history? As done by real (usually) women? Otherwise you're just knitting a pleasant fantasy for yourself. If the real is the feeling you get from listening to the podcast or identifying with a subculture, then that is the real for that person. Factual, grounded information is just one take. If it was not this way, we would have much less myths, religions, etc historically. People will feel the same degree of joy and completion when the final word of the podcast is read like you feel when you finish a really complex piece of work.

ratmice 5mo ago

Can't wear feelings and validation...

augment_me 5mo ago
If you only care about the material and physical utility of the product, you can order the sweater from AliExpress for 5% of the cost and no time spent.
- ratmice 5mo ago
  Seriously? You can't get the feeling of satisfaction of wearing something, or having someone wear something you made from AliExpress. My point is your sense of feeling and validation is extremely distorted if you have no knitted material to show for it?
  - augment_me 5mo ago
    Completely subjective take by you with similar epistemology around value as the blog author. People might not care. I might identify as a runner because I bought a little jacket, expensive shoes, and wide-purple-tinted sunglasses, do I have to run? Not necessarily if the objects and my identity gives me the feeling of completion and satisfaction. If your premise was true for all people, and the sense would be distorted, we would not see these phenomena, and people wouldn't listen or engage with AI-content. But the biological reality and the path of least resistance seems to prove us otherwise.
- nephihaha 5mo ago
  Knitting is enjoyable for many people and can even be a form of stress relief. AliExpress is just more consumption.
  - augment_me 5mo ago
    The same way that the AI generated podcast about knitting, or engaging in consumption is enjoyable for many people and a form of stress relief, which was the point that the comment above was criticizing. So the conclusion is that the utility of the activity is subjective, and if most people spend their time listening to AI factually incorrect podcasts about knitting and enjoying it, it's no different than knitting yourself and enjoying it. The blog was poor in this disambiguation, and pushed a more Aristotole-like ontological view of what is meaningful, which is more common view in engineering/hard-science dominated fields.