Here's a thought experiment.
-
Here's a thought experiment.
Imagine a stamp mark with the words "Made with #AI" on it.
If you see this mark on a picture, illustration, mobile app, song, movie, or story - do you get the notion that this product is of higher, lower or unchanged quality?
If you see two identical products for the same price, where one has an AI mark and the other doesn't - which one would you buy?
@sjn As long as you won’t tell what kind of product it is and how AI is related all bets are off
This way your poll is a psychological pattern without any value -
Here's a thought experiment.
Imagine a stamp mark with the words "Made with #AI" on it.
If you see this mark on a picture, illustration, mobile app, song, movie, or story - do you get the notion that this product is of higher, lower or unchanged quality?
If you see two identical products for the same price, where one has an AI mark and the other doesn't - which one would you buy?
@sjn well, "it depends", doesn't it?
there's a difference between "made with ai" and "made by ai".
yet, i'd regard such a mark as a signal to stay off the object marked.
-
@gisgeek @rpbook @sjn
pardon my French, but what the fuck are you blabbering?legality doesn't matter for the question of whether or not you should scrape the web and abuse art for some uncredited heuristic amalgamation without any artistic vision or value
a couple of assholes (including users of LLMs) burning the planet for inherently disrespectful consumerism isn't something that should stop you from still creating and publishing, unless you've already given up on life anyway
-
@sjn
Ah nice example the image. Let me explain. Incidentally, I'm perfectly able to draw a self-portrait of myself in Moebius style. But I had no intention to do that for a series of reason, including the time to dedicate to use ink and colors for that (I'm an old fashioned amateur comic book artist). I deliberately choose to not doing that. So the use of AI says exactly nothing about me (i.e, it is not relevant) which is the point. Did you draw your avatar personally?I wouldn't say, that it says nothing about yourself.
It says what you're willing to show others as a visual representation of yourself and it's not flattering.That you're willing to use "AI" for your profile picture at all already says a lot.
It reminds me of all those incels who used to have profile pictures of half naked women or their "anime waifu" and didn't get, how this is an issue, especially when approaching women.
The lack of self-awareness is similar.
-
Here's a thought experiment.
Imagine a stamp mark with the words "Made with #AI" on it.
If you see this mark on a picture, illustration, mobile app, song, movie, or story - do you get the notion that this product is of higher, lower or unchanged quality?
If you see two identical products for the same price, where one has an AI mark and the other doesn't - which one would you buy?
@sjn how it’s used not if it’s used influences the outcome.
-
@sjn
The use of AI is not relevant for quality. One produces good or bad products with or without AI use.
It is definitely dependent on the human side, whether or not her/his homework is done. Let me say that I saw shitty code produced by humans and AI, as well as good enough code.While you're right with what you say you circumvent the actual question.
It's about the expected/perceived level of quality, not the actual quality (and maybe about morality).
If the prices are the same would you buy the organic fair traded oranges or the ones that come from a company known for exploiting their workers and not caring for environmental impacts of their production?
-
@sjn @gisgeek "I think that strictly within the software development field, you may have a point - under the right circumstances." hard disagree, and honestly, people thinking that putting bits of already existing code together until it looks like it working is the same as software development is insulting to say the least.
Like, I can heap a lot of actual shit together in a river until stuff can pass to the other side and call it a bridge... but that doesn't make me an engineer.
Funny thing is, this isn't even new. I had students in the past (~2008) who blatantly copied and pasted stack overflow solutions to a compiling program that almost did the things they wanted them to do.
Unfortunately these programs also did a lot more, a lot wrong and didn't show structure or a recognizable thought process behind it.
These students couldn't even describe what their code, that they claimed they wrote themselves, was supposed to do.
Feels a lot like vibe coding nowadays, with the main difference, that each if these students realized that they had to put in the effort to learn their basics to actually receive their grades (Most of them did) and it was part of their learning journey.
IMHO this stage of realization is missing with most vibe coders nowadays, so these people never actually start a learning journey.
-
Here's a thought experiment.
Imagine a stamp mark with the words "Made with #AI" on it.
If you see this mark on a picture, illustration, mobile app, song, movie, or story - do you get the notion that this product is of higher, lower or unchanged quality?
If you see two identical products for the same price, where one has an AI mark and the other doesn't - which one would you buy?
@sjn I’m trying to think of a non-frontational analogy, so let’s park electricity & metal for now. How would “made with plastic” or “sugar” look? Is current AI more like plastic, or sugar?
-
Here's a thought experiment.
Imagine a stamp mark with the words "Made with #AI" on it.
If you see this mark on a picture, illustration, mobile app, song, movie, or story - do you get the notion that this product is of higher, lower or unchanged quality?
If you see two identical products for the same price, where one has an AI mark and the other doesn't - which one would you buy?
@sjn
apparently not many people from marketing departments voted here
-
@sjn
The use of AI is not relevant for quality. One produces good or bad products with or without AI use.
It is definitely dependent on the human side, whether or not her/his homework is done. Let me say that I saw shitty code produced by humans and AI, as well as good enough code.@gisgeek
basically correct ...but if a company thinks they must try to make their product appear more advanced by advertising with AI features i get the impression they spend more thought on mimick innovation instead of creating innovation
and thats where i start assuming the AI product is likely worse
@sjn -
Here's a thought experiment.
Imagine a stamp mark with the words "Made with #AI" on it.
If you see this mark on a picture, illustration, mobile app, song, movie, or story - do you get the notion that this product is of higher, lower or unchanged quality?
If you see two identical products for the same price, where one has an AI mark and the other doesn't - which one would you buy?
@sjn Impressive result, given the high number of votes.
-
@sjn
Anyway, thanks for your poll; it sparked a possible blog post where I could better articulate why quality is a human-driven goal, not something intrinsically present or absent in AI-aided design. High-quality or good enough are often the choices in many fields, regardless of tools. -
Here's a thought experiment.
Imagine a stamp mark with the words "Made with #AI" on it.
If you see this mark on a picture, illustration, mobile app, song, movie, or story - do you get the notion that this product is of higher, lower or unchanged quality?
If you see two identical products for the same price, where one has an AI mark and the other doesn't - which one would you buy?
@sjn Thanks for pulling the pro AI dweebs out of the woodwork so that we may block them
