3 ms·

I think it's important to focus on self-development / mastery of skills, even if they are theoretically replaceable by an AI or technology more generally. For

I think it's important to focus on self-development / mastery of skills, even if they are theoretically replaceable by an AI or technology more generally. For example – maybe AI will make 90% of video editing work unnecessary. But knowing how to edit video properly, when to cut, how to tell stories, etc. is an invaluable skill that is worth learning. I think this applies to pretty much any skill. Just because a computer can do it doesn't mean it's not worth mastering on an individual level.

Imustaskforhelp 4mo ago
I agree but differently. My opinion, is that we see soooo much of AI slop without any intent or taste behind it while being completely bland. I think that it is just up to taking responsibility of your output which can be the key factor into what I call authenticity, because what I am seeing is people not take responsibility of AI generated output and sometimes even push it to production. Tangentially, hackernews itself is sometimes filled with 100% AI slop articles/posts which is a bit sad... :-( The latest term for this in the AI-hype-sphere seems to be "intent" but I like to call it authenticity behind who the person is behind any output perhaps IMO. An article that I had written sometime ago: https://smileplease.mataroa.blog/blog/i-dont-want-brand-age-i-want-authenticity-age/ https://smileplease.mataroa.blog/blog/i-dont-want-brand-age-... Simon's article about taking responsibility also is an interesting read and I still like his mostly nuanced opinions rather than complete AI hype which is a bit rare. I respect both simon and mitchell and their opinions for the most part regarding things in this space and its always good to have a discussion with them. Edit: I have edited my post to explain better as to what I was saying.

3 ms·

I think it's important to focus on self-development / mastery of skills, even if they are theoretically replaceable by an AI or technology more generally. For

by keiferski 4mo ago

Imustaskforhelp 4mo ago
I agree but differently. My opinion, is that we see soooo much of AI slop without any intent or taste behind it while being completely bland. I think that it is just up to taking responsibility of your output which can be the key factor into what I call authenticity, because what I am seeing is people not take responsibility of AI generated output and sometimes even push it to production. Tangentially, hackernews itself is sometimes filled with 100% AI slop articles/posts which is a bit sad... :-( The latest term for this in the AI-hype-sphere seems to be "intent" but I like to call it authenticity behind who the person is behind any output perhaps IMO. An article that I had written sometime ago: https://smileplease.mataroa.blog/blog/i-dont-want-brand-age-i-want-authenticity-age/ https://smileplease.mataroa.blog/blog/i-dont-want-brand-age-... Simon's article about taking responsibility also is an interesting read and I still like his mostly nuanced opinions rather than complete AI hype which is a bit rare. I respect both simon and mitchell and their opinions for the most part regarding things in this space and its always good to have a discussion with them. Edit: I have edited my post to explain better as to what I was saying.