I Am An AI Hater

Re:I Am An AI Hater by petralithic on Wednesday August 27, 2025 @05:57PM (#45045834)

I still don't get why you don't see it as a tool and not the creator itself. The human sitting behind the desk is the one attaching their emotions to what they send, because they control what image they want to send, otherwise they reroll or redo their work flow. These days they can even edit the image with natural language so they can build it up just as one does in Photoshop, only using words instead of a mouse.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Am An AI Hater by jacquesm on Wednesday August 27, 2025 @06:11PM (#45045974)

> I still don't get why you don't see it as a tool and not the creator itself.

If after 33 comments in this thread and countless people trying to explain a part of it you don't get it that may be because you either don't want to get it or are unable to get it. Restating it one more time is not going to make a difference and I'm perfectly ok with you not 'getting it', so don't worry about it.

AI without real art as input is noise. It doesn't get any more concrete than that. Humans without any education at all and just mud and sticks for tools will spontaneously create art.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Am An AI Hater by petralithic on Wednesday August 27, 2025 @07:18PM (#45046485)

Or perhaps your initial premise ("AI without real art as input is noise") is simply wrong. By "get it," I'm trying to understand why you'd believe such a premise, yes even after 33 comments, because there is no underlying rationale to it, or rather, you never state it in a direct manner.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Am An AI Hater by necovek on Thursday August 28, 2025 @12:46AM (#45048466)

This is where you might be "not getting it". A human can carefully weigh every word, every swipe of a brush, or every tone... weigh it for the emotional expression and connection it produces (frequently subconscious). Whereas AI as a tool simply can't.

This is a difference between using a gradient in Photoshop, which is still a tool, and generative AI which will make "decisions" you as an author can't explain or connect with.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Am An AI Hater by petralithic on Friday August 29, 2025 @04:20AM (#45061544)

How is this different from an electronic music producer? They similarly arrange notes without having played them physically. So too with people generating an image as a rough draft then editing every part of it, which is mainly what I'm talking about, not someone who types in a prompt and accepts whatever comes out.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Am An AI Hater by jibal on Thursday August 28, 2025 @12:36PM (#45054199)

Some people are simply irrational, and there's no point trying to point out to them their logic errors.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I Am An AI Hater by lesostep on Friday August 29, 2025 @07:04AM (#45062539)

>> The human sitting behind the desk is the one attaching their emotions to what they send

natural question: to you draw? Even a simple thing, even a doodle of a cat would count. A particular emoji drawn for a joke. Have you ever drew a line, and then smile to yourself "yes, that is what i want other people to see?"

People can draw poorly or make collages, and come up with pretty expressive art. Those who say "well I can't express myself with stick figures" coincidentally can't express anything without stickfigures too. They just never payed enough attention to the subject to express it.

Personal anecdote: when I ask people why X is in the art they send me, they answer happily. When I ask people with AI art that, they say "oh, you nitpicking". As if some details don't and shouldn't influence art expression. As if all details that weren't in a prompt, shouldn't express anything.

AI art is a concept muddled. It's a grave for intentionallity. It's not easy to decipher creators intent through a cacophony of other intents mixed in because almost none of art choices were made with the intent to convey.

[ Parent | on HN ]