←back to thread

757 points alihm | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
meander_water ◴[] No.44469163[source]
> the "taste-skill discrepancy." Your taste (your ability to recognize quality) develops faster than your skill (your ability to produce it). This creates what Ira Glass famously called "the gap," but I think of it as the thing that separates creators from consumers.

This resonated quite strongly with me. It puts into words something that I've been feeling when working with AI. If you're new to something and using AI for it, it automatically boosts the floor of your taste, but not your skill. And you end up never slowing down to make mistakes and learn, because you can just do it without friction.

replies(8): >>44469175 #>>44469439 #>>44469556 #>>44469609 #>>44470520 #>>44470531 #>>44470633 #>>44474386 #
furyofantares ◴[] No.44469609[source]
I'm confused. I often say of every genAI I've seen of all types that it is totally lacking in taste and only has skill. And it drastically raises your skill floor immediately, perhaps all the way up to your taste, closing the gap.

Maybe that actually is what you were saying? But I'm confused because you used the opposite words.

replies(4): >>44470373 #>>44472200 #>>44472295 #>>44473313 #
1. furyofantares ◴[] No.44473313[source]
After sleeping on it and reading some replies I think I worked out what they were saying. Take drawing - your skill at producing an image is raised to a professional aesthetic (what I was saying) but your skill at drawing is unchanged (what they are saying).

But they're saying your taste, in the context of self-judgment at attempting to learn to draw, might also be raised to a professional aesthetic, because you can already produce images of that level by typing words.

I guess I will add that a difference here is we are talking about taste somewhat differently. To me, genai has been a demonstration that taste and skill are not two points on the same dimension.