Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by abpavel 744 days ago
Feels like humans cheering for Kasparov when he beat Deep Blue. That fleeting moment in time, a crest of a wave, before the change of times.
4 comments

What changed exactly? Humans are still competing in chess, earning livelihoods, building fan bases. The ELO world rankings don't have any machines because the International Chess Federation only allows humans to enter competitions, just like all the other IOC sanctioned sports governing bodies. I'm sure Boston Dynamics has long been able to make a robot that can run faster than Usain Bolt, but nobody cared and it didn't matter because robots aren't allowed to compete in officially sanctioned track events. Similar to why MLB teams can't use pitching machines instead of pitchers. A Phalanx can't enter a shooting competition. Wrestling federations don't actually allow man versus car like in Rick and Morty's interdimensional cable.

In some endeavors, humans doing it is the entire point.

Photography captures a real moment, place, or thing.

Generative AI may replace the pictures that hang on the walls of hotel rooms, but I don't see it coming for the photographs in peoples homes, or even art galleries. At least, not at any real scale.

  Do not go gentle into that good night,
  Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
  Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Can AI come up with new novel things? A nature photographer could , through luck and hard work, photograph a new species of animal while traveling through an unexplored area. Could AI do that?
Depends on what you mean by novel. When a photographer takes a photo of a new species, are they really creating a new thing? Or just capturing the novelty that nature created? And the form of the species itself is subject to physical and evolutionary constraints, so how novel is it really?
> Could AI do that?

... yes? Have you actually played around with photo generation tools? You can absolutely generate novel images.

At the risk of stating the obvious and wasting people's time, it seems pretty self-evident that knowing about the existence of a species we didn't know about before is more interesting than someone creating an image of something that may or may not exist.
I think you're asserting your opinion about a strawman situation as fact...

Put another, slightly more concrete way: what is more interesting, a photograph of a newly discovered moon of Jupiter, or a new album by Taylor Swift? Obviously people are interested in different things. Believe it or not, many people would forget about the new moon or new species within seconds or minutes.

If someone used generative AI tools to create a visually impactful image, I could imagine someone hanging it on their wall, and being completely disinterested in a photo of a newly discovered jellyfish.

People simply have different interests.

Yes, AI can decide to go on a nature expedition on its own? The delusion has really gone out of hand.
What? That's not what they asked?

> Can AI come up with new novel things?

... still yes. You can use generative AI to general novel text, images, videos, and sounds just as much as you can record or photograph something that has never been captured before with a camera or microphone.

Why did you have such a negative emotional response to such a plain fact?

Edit: wait I said "they" because I thought you clearly misread the comment, but I just realized you posted it yourself. Now I'm really confused.