←back to thread

20 points praveeninpublic | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.233s | 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?

1. NoahZuniga ◴[] No.43815801[source]
AI "art" feels soulless because basically always there's very little thought and effort put into it. Some people have experienced so much low effort AI media that their default response to it is just "this is bad".

There is of course interesting thought provoking art you can do with AI, but oftentimes it isn't.

Code on the other hand is supposed to be effective, so it being "soulless" doesn't matter.

Also relevant, people value art because it evokes feelings. This means that something just looking nice isn't the only or most important piece of art.