←back to thread

20 points praveeninpublic | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.436s | source

While browsing YouTube, an AI-generated video appeared and I reflexively told my wife, “That’s AI—skip it.”

Yet I’m using AI-created illustrations for my graphic novel, fully aware of copyright and legal debates.

Both Copilots and art generators are trained on vast datasets—so why do we cheer one and vilify the other?

We lean on ChatGPT to rewrite blog posts and celebrate Copilot for “boosting productivity,” but AI art still raises eyebrows.

Is this a matter of domain familiarity, perceived craftsmanship, or simple cultural gatekeeping?

Show context
throwaway2317 ◴[] No.43806863[source]
I vilify code LLMs every time I review a colleague's code, ask them why they wrote something a certain way, and they can't explain. ChatGPT prose is even worse: it's like a corporate press release, only even blander and happytalker.
replies(2): >>43807099 #>>43807310 #
1. 2muchcoffeeman ◴[] No.43807099[source]
You get whole blocks of code written by AI? No reviewing from the original dev???
replies(1): >>43812057 #
2. TheNewsIsHere ◴[] No.43812057[source]
Honest question in reply: If you need to vibe code your way through a real programming job how are you supposed to review your own work?