←back to thread

Ask HN: Why do we celebrate AI-Copilots but reject AI–Generated art?

20 points praveeninpublic | 1 comments | 26 Apr 25 19:13 UTC | HN request time: 0.619s | 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
jarofgreen ◴[26 Apr 25 20:47 UTC] No.43807069[source]▶
I'm not sure we can be certain everyone has that view. I get the impression many of the people who vilify art generators are also against coding copilots.

> I reflexively told my wife, “That’s AI—skip it.”

> Yet I’m using AI-created illustrations for my graphic novel

Aren't you worried people will skip your graphic novel?

replies(1): >>43807133 #
aDyslecticCrow ◴[26 Apr 25 20:55 UTC] No.43807133[source]▶
If I see AI art in a graphic novel, I'll stop reading and downvote it.
replies(2): >>43807336 #>>43807449 #
1. prophesi ◴[26 Apr 25 21:41 UTC] No.43807449[source]▶
For webnovels I've found it useful as someone who has borderline aphantasia. But in this case, the webnovels would normally have no graphics whatsoever in their chapters aside from the webnovel's cover art (which is usually done by an actual graphic designer).

It's very obvious that they're AI generated, and the authors are typically upfront about it. I still feel a bit of an ick when I see them, and Patreon discussions for the creators I follow also have similar sentiments. Not sure if it's truly a tolerable use-case for AI, but thought I'd throw it out there.