4 ms·

Get used to it. This is the future we've created for ourselves. It's only going to get worse as people everywhere try to use AI to distinguish themselves. Expec

Get used to it. This is the future we've created for ourselves. It's only going to get worse as people everywhere try to use AI to distinguish themselves. Expect everyone to be an artist, everyone to be an author, everyone to be a programmer. Slop. It's what's for dinner.

hnlmorg 5mo ago
The problem isn’t the use of AI. It’s the lack of editorial effort to use AI well. Modern image generation models can handle text fine. Or the author could have left those artefacts blank and added the text themselves in “post production”
- eapriv 5mo ago
  The problem is the use of AI. It’s a reliable indicator that the author doesn’t actually care about the quality of the work, so I shouldn’t bother to read the text.
  - hnlmorg 5mo ago
    Using AI to generate an image isn’t any different to embedding a generated meme or grabbing a stock photo. Plus the image isn’t even part of the article content. It’s ostensibly just a front cover to it. I’m sure you’ve heard the saying “don’t judge a book by its cover” ;)
    - hnlmorg 5mo ago
      To the people who downvoted me, care to explain what was factually incorrect? I get there’s a lot of hysteria around Gen ai but as someone who’s worked in publishing I can tell you I’m not in the wrong here.
      - queenkjuul 5mo ago
        Stock photos are (generally) made by professionals, memes impart some social context. Can't say either about an AI image. So i absolutely hold an AI image in less esteem, especially when someone clearly just used the first draft spit out by the model where all of the text is wrong and the image doesn't even resemble what it purports to illustrate.
        hnlmorg 5mo ago
        > Stock photos are (generally) made by professionals GenAI models are made by professionals. But in both our cases, it’s a different set of professionals to the ones who chose which images to use in their articles. > memes impart some social context The “social context” here is just regurgitating an unrelated viral joke. I’d hardly say that requires more respect of the readers than a purpose generated image that is intended specifically for context of that article. Plus you can use GenAI to generate a meme too if you really wanted. > Can't say either about an AI image I literally just did ;) > So i absolutely hold an AI image in less esteem, especially when someone clearly just used the first draft spit out by the model where all of the text is wrong and the image doesn't even resemble what it purports to illustrate. And this is exactly why I said “The problem isn’t the use of AI. It’s the lack of editorial effort to use AI well.” What you’re complaining about isn’t how the image came to be, it’s the shoddy workmanship. And that’s a different problem. Lazy people will choose images lazily regardless of the tech. The problem here isn’t the use of AI, it’s the lack of editorial care. Or to put it another way, if the author used a bad stock photo or offensive meme, then we wouldnt be blaming the tech. But when they use GenAI to produce the same shoddy output we do blame the tech. That screams like our own biases affecting who we blame the for crappy image rather than an inherent problem with the technology. And if we then acknowledge that the problem isn’t inherent in the tech, then we are back to agreeing with my original point.
        queenkjuul 5mo ago
        No if they used a bad stock photo it wouldn't be worth noticing and if it were an offensive meme it would have been chosen with intent. A bad AI image is so bad to be worth noticing and serves no other purpose than to fill up space hoping nobody notices how bad it is (which, yes, is what stock image are for, but those are made by IMAGE MAKING PROFESSIONALS so even the bad ones are inoffensive. Doctors and mechanics are both professionals so you'll get Dialysis from a Jiffy Lube?)
dragonwriter 5mo ago
This is just lazy AI use as a replacement for lazy stock image use. The details of exactly how it sucks at its job while providing something that fills a checkbox for someone who has no concern for quality are somewhat different, but the basic failure is the same.
- queenkjuul 5mo ago
  Generic but professional stock image >>>> AI slop with gibberish text, every single time
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]

hnlmorg 5mo ago

The problem isn’t the use of AI. It’s the lack of editorial effort to use AI well. Modern image generation models can handle text fine. Or the author could have left those artefacts blank and added the text themselves in “post production”

eapriv 5mo ago
The problem is the use of AI. It’s a reliable indicator that the author doesn’t actually care about the quality of the work, so I shouldn’t bother to read the text.
- hnlmorg 5mo ago
  Using AI to generate an image isn’t any different to embedding a generated meme or grabbing a stock photo. Plus the image isn’t even part of the article content. It’s ostensibly just a front cover to it. I’m sure you’ve heard the saying “don’t judge a book by its cover” ;)
  - hnlmorg 5mo ago
    To the people who downvoted me, care to explain what was factually incorrect? I get there’s a lot of hysteria around Gen ai but as someone who’s worked in publishing I can tell you I’m not in the wrong here.
    - queenkjuul 5mo ago
      Stock photos are (generally) made by professionals, memes impart some social context. Can't say either about an AI image. So i absolutely hold an AI image in less esteem, especially when someone clearly just used the first draft spit out by the model where all of the text is wrong and the image doesn't even resemble what it purports to illustrate.
      - hnlmorg 5mo ago
        > Stock photos are (generally) made by professionals GenAI models are made by professionals. But in both our cases, it’s a different set of professionals to the ones who chose which images to use in their articles. > memes impart some social context The “social context” here is just regurgitating an unrelated viral joke. I’d hardly say that requires more respect of the readers than a purpose generated image that is intended specifically for context of that article. Plus you can use GenAI to generate a meme too if you really wanted. > Can't say either about an AI image I literally just did ;) > So i absolutely hold an AI image in less esteem, especially when someone clearly just used the first draft spit out by the model where all of the text is wrong and the image doesn't even resemble what it purports to illustrate. And this is exactly why I said “The problem isn’t the use of AI. It’s the lack of editorial effort to use AI well.” What you’re complaining about isn’t how the image came to be, it’s the shoddy workmanship. And that’s a different problem. Lazy people will choose images lazily regardless of the tech. The problem here isn’t the use of AI, it’s the lack of editorial care. Or to put it another way, if the author used a bad stock photo or offensive meme, then we wouldnt be blaming the tech. But when they use GenAI to produce the same shoddy output we do blame the tech. That screams like our own biases affecting who we blame the for crappy image rather than an inherent problem with the technology. And if we then acknowledge that the problem isn’t inherent in the tech, then we are back to agreeing with my original point.
        queenkjuul 5mo ago
        No if they used a bad stock photo it wouldn't be worth noticing and if it were an offensive meme it would have been chosen with intent. A bad AI image is so bad to be worth noticing and serves no other purpose than to fill up space hoping nobody notices how bad it is (which, yes, is what stock image are for, but those are made by IMAGE MAKING PROFESSIONALS so even the bad ones are inoffensive. Doctors and mechanics are both professionals so you'll get Dialysis from a Jiffy Lube?)

dragonwriter 5mo ago

This is just lazy AI use as a replacement for lazy stock image use. The details of exactly how it sucks at its job while providing something that fills a checkbox for someone who has no concern for quality are somewhat different, but the basic failure is the same.

queenkjuul 5mo ago
Generic but professional stock image >>>> AI slop with gibberish text, every single time

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]