3 ms·

The article author should have specified more closely which type of image. Stock image sites had already made generic photos and drawings cheap to include. And

The article author should have specified more closely which type of image. Stock image sites had already made generic photos and drawings cheap to include. And indeed they look cheap. The more airbrushed and high quality the cheaper it looks. If a dentist website has cheap beautiful stock nurse photos, it's less valued than real photos taken by a photographer at their location.

PaulHoule 3mo ago
Once in a while you get a good one, one that stands out among all the others, and that's a worse outcome because the same image will be used by everybody including your competitors.
mosura 3mo ago
At that point why have images at all? Just go full American Psycho eggshell business card.
- chaosharmonic 3mo ago
  The OP doesn't have images.
ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
It's hard to articulate this stuff, and especially hard to explain it to the AI infatuated among us because they don't really want to understand why people dislike the tooling they're obsessed with. AI is good at many things, digesting vast quantities of information, and code being most of them. Everything else to me looks/sounds like shit. AI music sounds dull and overproduced in a way that a lot of middling pop music does. AI images look overtuned and strange in the same way a magazine editor would, if they had no self control with their tools. It just... looks bad. As an aesthetic. If you are not aesthetically minded, you may not care, or you may not be able to tell, and that's fine. But I am and I can and if I open your blog post and see AI crap, I'm leaving. I'm not asking anyone else to, and I don't give a shit if my best friend in the world wants to beat his meat to your AI generated sunset, good for him, I hope he has a great time. But I'm not interested. Why these super-pro-AI people take this as such a personal slight is strange to me. You didn't care enough to actually make something, what are you offended if I tell you I don't really want to look at it?
- bonoboTP 3mo ago
  The tools are getting better and often that overproduced thing is the toupee effect, where you don't notice the better ones. The generic look can be avoided with more customized prompting. You can make much more natural songs with longer prompts, a bit of quickly self-sung melodies you add as references, even if you can't sing. Similarly for images, sketching something out in paint can make a huge difference or just iterating 2 or 3 times and not accepting the first result. And the tools are going to get better too.
  - Planktonne 3mo ago
    > especially hard to explain it to the AI infatuated among us because they don't really want to understand why people dislike the tooling they're obsessed with Your comment is an example of what the parent comment is discussing; the reflexive "you can't really tell and anyway you can do it better to stop people being able to tell and also soon it will be better so no one will be able to tell" is a gallop like the narcissist's prayer. People are telling you they can tell, and that they do care. The toupee fallacy works because there are good wigs that no one can identify unless told, but the idea that that there's actually brilliant AI prose (that no one has detected) always lacks examples.
    - zenoprax 3mo ago
      "AI Slop" seems to be misunderstood despite its simplicity: "this is sloppy/low-effort/unskilled work ... enabled by generative AI tools". > "People are telling you they can tell, and that they do care." In the same spirit, one could argue that "AI Slop" is actually constructive feedback to a small degree. It's a short-hand for "this is sloppy/low-effort/unskilled work with obvious utilization of generative AI tools". It's not much different than using the same photography filter for every post on Instagram or picking the most popular Wordpress theme --- if you are expecting praise for that then you will be disappointed.
      - ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
        I do deeply enjoy that apparently among gen-Alpha, it's a common thing to say when someone says something really stupid, or makes something of poor quality, to call it "AI." The kids are alright.

PaulHoule 3mo ago

Once in a while you get a good one, one that stands out among all the others, and that's a worse outcome because the same image will be used by everybody including your competitors.

mosura 3mo ago

At that point why have images at all? Just go full American Psycho eggshell business card.

chaosharmonic 3mo ago
The OP doesn't have images.

ToucanLoucan 3mo ago

It's hard to articulate this stuff, and especially hard to explain it to the AI infatuated among us because they don't really want to understand why people dislike the tooling they're obsessed with. AI is good at many things, digesting vast quantities of information, and code being most of them. Everything else to me looks/sounds like shit. AI music sounds dull and overproduced in a way that a lot of middling pop music does. AI images look overtuned and strange in the same way a magazine editor would, if they had no self control with their tools. It just... looks bad. As an aesthetic. If you are not aesthetically minded, you may not care, or you may not be able to tell, and that's fine. But I am and I can and if I open your blog post and see AI crap, I'm leaving. I'm not asking anyone else to, and I don't give a shit if my best friend in the world wants to beat his meat to your AI generated sunset, good for him, I hope he has a great time. But I'm not interested. Why these super-pro-AI people take this as such a personal slight is strange to me. You didn't care enough to actually make something, what are you offended if I tell you I don't really want to look at it?

bonoboTP 3mo ago
The tools are getting better and often that overproduced thing is the toupee effect, where you don't notice the better ones. The generic look can be avoided with more customized prompting. You can make much more natural songs with longer prompts, a bit of quickly self-sung melodies you add as references, even if you can't sing. Similarly for images, sketching something out in paint can make a huge difference or just iterating 2 or 3 times and not accepting the first result. And the tools are going to get better too.
- Planktonne 3mo ago
  > especially hard to explain it to the AI infatuated among us because they don't really want to understand why people dislike the tooling they're obsessed with Your comment is an example of what the parent comment is discussing; the reflexive "you can't really tell and anyway you can do it better to stop people being able to tell and also soon it will be better so no one will be able to tell" is a gallop like the narcissist's prayer. People are telling you they can tell, and that they do care. The toupee fallacy works because there are good wigs that no one can identify unless told, but the idea that that there's actually brilliant AI prose (that no one has detected) always lacks examples.
  - zenoprax 3mo ago
    "AI Slop" seems to be misunderstood despite its simplicity: "this is sloppy/low-effort/unskilled work ... enabled by generative AI tools". > "People are telling you they can tell, and that they do care." In the same spirit, one could argue that "AI Slop" is actually constructive feedback to a small degree. It's a short-hand for "this is sloppy/low-effort/unskilled work with obvious utilization of generative AI tools". It's not much different than using the same photography filter for every post on Instagram or picking the most popular Wordpress theme --- if you are expecting praise for that then you will be disappointed.
    - ToucanLoucan 3mo ago
      I do deeply enjoy that apparently among gen-Alpha, it's a common thing to say when someone says something really stupid, or makes something of poor quality, to call it "AI." The kids are alright.