←back to thread

114 points valgaze | 9 comments | | HN request time: 1.125s | source | bottom
Show context
cercatrova ◴[] No.32461248[source]
Title should be more like, artists concerned about Stable Diffusion AI model that makes images look human-made.
replies(1): >>32461290 #
antiterra ◴[] No.32461290[source]
It also apparently copies the artist’s logo.

In a way, the “it just does what humans do but faster” argument is starting to follow the “a number can’t be illegal” trajectory.

replies(1): >>32461342 #
cercatrova ◴[] No.32461342[source]
Either way I support AI art and AI in other fields. Just because artists are mad it's gonna take their jobs does not seem like a legitimate reason to halt human progress. It's just inevitable the way things are going.
replies(6): >>32461451 #>>32461558 #>>32461593 #>>32461841 #>>32462157 #>>32462306 #
1. egypturnash ◴[] No.32462157[source]
Please save this comment to refer to when an iteration of Copilot starts to make you truly worried for the future of your career. Thanks in advance.
replies(3): >>32462311 #>>32462757 #>>32463102 #
2. orangecat ◴[] No.32462311[source]
Yeah, and we should really do something about those abominations like Excel and Python that let ordinary people create programs without hiring us to do it the right way.
replies(1): >>32462430 #
3. egypturnash ◴[] No.32462430[source]
There is a big difference between "this is a tool that makes some things easier" and "this is definitely endangering the skill I spent a lifetime learning".

You will know it when you see it.

replies(1): >>32468130 #
4. yanderekko ◴[] No.32462757[source]
Yes, many of us will turn into cowards when automation starts to touch our work, but that would not prove this sentiment incorrect - only that we're cowards.
replies(1): >>32462929 #
5. egypturnash ◴[] No.32462929[source]
Dude. What the hell kind of anti-life philosophy are you subscribing to that calls "being unhappy about people trying to automate an entire field of human behavior" being a "coward". Geez.
replies(1): >>32463198 #
6. samatman ◴[] No.32463102[source]
I don't see this as a likely outcome for programming assistants.

Software development is heavily labor-constrained, if copilot can make everyone a 10x developer, we'll get slightly less than 10x the features-per-year on an industry-wide basis after contributors shuffle around.

The effect will be most pronounced in application development, where a team of 1-5 is about ideal for a coherent app made with taste, and that team could produce the output of 10-50 developers. Not such a bad thing.

Unfortunately this is unlikely to be true for visiual art, I don't predict that making artists ten times as productive will meet a latent demand for ten times as much art. Could be wrong, but my sense is that about as much art is purchased as people want to buy.

7. yanderekko ◴[] No.32463198{3}[source]
Because automation is generally good, but making an exemption for specific cases of automation that personally inconvenience you is rooted is cowardice/selfishness. Similar to NIMBYism.
8. MacsHeadroom ◴[] No.32468130{3}[source]
There is no big difference. The steam engine put 90% of the world out of agricultural work. That is a big difference. Now you can buy strawberries all year round and drink coconut water in Alaska.

Nobody will care where their art comes from any more than you care about how your food's field was plowed; and all their lives will be better for it.

replies(1): >>32469756 #
9. egypturnash ◴[] No.32469756{4}[source]
There is a huge difference in how you will feel when the tool that might put you out of work shows up.

Keep your comment somewhere. Come back to it when you look at a new tool that promises to merrily trample on your entire field’s income and provide an endless source of “usable, I guess” substitutes. Let it provide solace as you stare into a future with no room for the craft you’ve spent a lifetime honing.