[gwern]

But doesn't that make it bad? It doesn't say anything new. Unlike the software in question, which is personalized, so it's not even symbolically reflecting the topic. It's a sheer waste of pixels and time spent looking at it or scrolling past the cognitive junk food.

[i_think_so]

Come on, bro. Why you gotta be like that?

I mean, I'm a gwern fan, but...can't you just let people enjoy things?

[gwern]

I didn't enjoy it. It flunks my criteria for good AI images, because there is no there there: https://gwern.net/blog/2025/good-ai-samples It wasted my thoughts as I stared at it, trying to learn about the author and 'X uses this' and thinking about how moleskin notebooks related to personal computing etc... only to realize I had been lied to and my time wasted, as he took advantage of my good faith - the good faith I extend to a fellow hacker, that their images will be meaningful and worth reading.

Just as their words are presumed to be meaningful and worth reading... but slightly less so every day, I fear.

[i_think_so]

> I didn't enjoy it.

Then it wasn't for you. No big whoop.

> It wasted my thoughts as I stared at it,

I think we have arrived at the kernel of the problem. :-)

The rest of this comment is left as an exercise for the student.

[gwern]

> Then it wasn't for you. No big whoop.

Ah yes. I remember this in Penny Arcade: https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/24/the-adventures...

[AlecSchueler]

Consider the cost of generating the image.

[computably]

> can't you just let people enjoy things?

Dumping slop into the public commons deserves criticism.