Ask HN: Disillusioned after AI?
Maybe it’s me but the advances in AI are just leaving me feeling disillusioned as a builder. There’s an odd feeling that whatever I am going to build will just get gobbled away by some big tech company. The demos just become more cringey, the messaging more duplicitous and fake-authentic. I’m wondering if anyone else has wrestled with similar feelings or maybe I am just going through a rough patch.
116 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 184 ms ] thread> whatever I am going to build will just get gobbled away by some big tech company
This has been happening since the industry existed. X company copies/acquires Y and things go to die. New things pop up, the cycle repeats.
Sounds like you're going through a rough patch.
Completely agree, and this is a sign that they're just riding the hype train. Why does that make you feel disillusioned? What do you want to build or are building that would get gobbled away?
This is the part that frightens me somewhat, because I don't think the public is prepared for what's coming. Although, it's of secondary concern to me versus your first point:
> de-democratizing tech
...which is certainly problematic.
I'm at a point right now where I haven't fully decided what to think. On any given day, my Facebook feed is filled with a growing collection of AI generated images, and more and more comments are expressing exasperation that it's "real" when the images are (to me) clearly generative "art." But, I think we're at a point where the average user is going to be duped by at least some small percentage of images that are out there. It wouldn't be too difficult to imagine a time in the next 5-10 years (maybe less) when the majority population is convinced of an imagined event that never happened.
More to your point, though, even companies that have a large volume of data to train on but simply don't have the resources are going to be "very second tier." I've noticed this with the AI subscription for Logos Bible Software. ChatGPT does a better job of answering questions, generally, than Logos which oftentimes can't even answer fairly trivial queries based on one's library. I've heard this has changed in the past couple of months for the better, but I'm not optimistic because of the capability mismatch.
1. Regulators finally think of something.
2. Internet is becoming increasingly full of AI-generated content which is bad as a training data.
https://imgur.com/a/qXcVNOM https://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.05530
This part sounds like you are going through a rough patch. Like you are feeling down, not sure why, and are digging around for reasons.
What you are saying is legit. What you are feeling is legit. But, it would be worth doing some deep chill soul-searching to figure out if these really are the reasons. Maybe you need a hike in the woods. Maybe you want a job better mission behind it. Maybe I'm full of shit.
Either way, best to laugh at cringey demos. Learn how to use AI. What is good for and what it's not. Use it or don't. Just build stuff people need either way.
Nobody's being fascist here. But, the old fashy trope of "The Enemy is both Too Weak and Too Powerful!" is echoing in here regardless.
If OP was annoyed at either extreme, I'd have nothing to say. But, being down about self-contradictory problems indicates that you're not clear what's got you down.
(downvoters: this is a joke, but I believe it has some truth to it)
1940s to 1980s you see tremendous velocity on nearly every dimension.
1980s to 2020s you have tremendous change on IT, minimal change on mechanics and either stagnation or decline on most other dimensions. Especially physical manifestations are stagnant or declining.
Of course you are going to find outliers, exceptions and overlap because this isn't a discrete space , it's more of a stochastic system with noisy observations.
> culturally stagnant generation
It definitely sounds like you should not use the word generation: otherwise you are pandering to bad stereotypes and miscommunicating your idea. 1980s to 2020s ain't no generation.
I have certainly become more of a recluse on the internet. I'm still figuring things out... at this time I think I'll pull more inwards. Do my own thing. Create my own art. Maybe I'll see you on the flip side? Maybe not.
for trying to do a passion project for accolades on your originality, with money as an afterthought, I can see that seeming more pointless
for an analogy: grocery stores don't need to be original, you can put one right across the street from another and we still need more grocery stores.
I didn't want to reply to anybody in particular so as to mitigate the provocation since this is HN. But this feels like a common sentiment among transhumanist etc types. Or maybe I'm imagining, but I bet a lot of us are feeling this way so I thought I'd call it out. I have no expectation of receiving any understanding. The future is not for people like us.
Very few startups are finding success and if they do it's short lived because it gets replaced or integrated natively by newer capabilities from existing major players.
There will be success stories but I haven't seen many novel ideas created using new AI tech that are not just an overlay on top of an LLM that people aren't willing to pay for.
I think the right state of mind is to explore and keep thinking about real world applications, even though at the moment it's basically just every existing saas inserting AI into their existing products.
This also has a beneficial side effect of showing you first-hand just how bad this tooling is currently and how far away it is from replacing builders wholesale. And to be clear, I'm not just talking about leveraging closed proprietary APIs for these efforts, I'm actually more referring to building your own training and inference stacks from scratch. The pedagogical impact alone can make up most of the ROI for your time spent.
I work at a startup that leaned into AI and a use case is simply detecting mis-classified products (happens all the time at large retailers).
On my own side projects, I'm using it in a travel app transparently to help extract places from travel blogs. Imagine you're trying to plan a trip and you find a blog that has a great itinerary. Using AI, it's trivial now to pull out all of the place names for your and organize just the days and destinations without the fluff.
I have another side project where I use AI to generate a customized daily newsletter based off of a feed from the FDA. The AI allows the recipient to ask whatever questions they might have against clinical trials registered with the FDA and automatically answers those questions and sends it along with a summary of the trial.
If anything, I think AI has opened up a vast field of new possibilities.
This tracks with my own experience for the last decade or so. I stopped being surprised at how many business problems can be, in part or in whole, reduced to classification issues.
Perhaps I'm just in the same boat - shouldn't be drawing any sort of emotional support from that.
It will stop when they run out of data, or when the training data needs to be isolated from the datasets created by GenAI.
So create something based on human creation. Sell it to the LLM trainers. It's the new business model....
I don't think it's hard at all for AI to create new styles. Will one of those become a new art movement? We'll have to wait a while for the retrospective.
Meanwhile, I'd recommend reading https://twitter.com/halecar2/status/1731612961465082167
And, checking out https://twitter.com/misterduchamp/status/1785009271010148734
Top Left: Gerhard Richter, Mark Bradford.
Top Center: Beeple (Mike Winkelmann), or V0idhead
Top Right: Wassily Kandinsky, László Moholy-Nagy
Middle Left: Benjamin Von Wong
Middle Center: Maurizio Cattelan
Middle Right: Takashi Murakami, Hayao Miyazaki
and so on....
I am sure any Human could, even if never seen a painting before, or read literature or seen a famous musician.
And 4 years is nothing in Art.
If you look at Renaissance, Baroque, Rococo, Neoclassicism you got around 100 years between each and 50 years between Impressionism , Modern Art and so on. For Jazz, Blues Hip Hop its around 20 to 40 years.
Maybe when LLMs have their own Cultural background they are ready to attack creativity :-)
I think it can because I think that "Style A + Style B + some unique qualities" is plenty to qualify as a new style. Like "Miyazaki made a new style from Toei Doga + Walt Disney + some unique qualities".
But, as expected, detractors require the goalposts to be defined as impossible to achieve. Generative AI has only been around for 4 years or so. Therefore, the current goalpost is placed at "It can't do anything new because it has not yet spawned a multi-decade movement" which is just silly.
Or, "It can't be creative because it can't yet physically go to school and instead it learns from a dataset" as if school was not a means to stream a dataset through a student :p Or, as if humans who never saw a painting before, but still swam constantly in an enormous dataset of nature and people, didn't make stick figure cave paintings.
At least this discussion is more interesting than the usual "I can tell just by being told it was made with AI that this piece has no soul". Where 'soul' is "A thing that AI is defined to not have that is unmeasurable in any way" And, therefore does not affect anything in any way and cannot be shown to exist or not because it is literally the fantasy of a ghost! :D
With AI I could merge an anime style with a hyper-realistic photo of a spider and see what style could come out.
And if the AI doesn't quite work for this, I could get it to generate a base and one can then finish it up by hand.
That's most real-world bands.
I guess we can use that to define when we achieve AGI. You mumble an input prompt and get a new Rolling Stones, U2 or Queen, a new Gabriel García Márquez or James Joyce.
Currently if it's not in the Dataset then...404 Creativity Not Found
AI is a tool. I feel its the attitude of the big players wielding those tools that is more the problem. Instead of applying AI to tedius unpleasant tasks they seem to want to go for the more creative tasks that we would classify as "The Arts". It seems the big players were applying AI to purely cut Labor costs.
Also related: https://youtu.be/nkdZRBFtqSs
AI is a baby, it only takes 5-10 years for it to become a teenager or adult, at that point it can do just about everything a human can do.
> There is for example no such thing as general intelligence I think general intelligence means a single machine that is better than 100% of people in every aspect, perhaps every reasoning and logical aspect at first, but when these are in machines -then also physical aspects. That is highly do-able in the next 5 years.
Y’all need to go back to school. I’m so tired.
In the era of the camera, people kept painting. Some still paint landscapes — others were driven to create new forms of expression.
Poets still exist in the era of tweets, and directors shoot on 35mm in the age of TikTok.
Change is constant — but there's always joy in finding something you love and diving deeply into it.
For me, coding is worthless if it doesn't solve a problem (of any kind), whether I typed it letter by letter or I instructed an LLM to type 60-80% of it, it's irrelevant really.
Sadly raycasters and fiddling with bits is a difficult way to pay for food and rent/mortage. Slinging yaml and json pays better.
Maybe one day I can retire from professional programming and become a hobby programmer...
I wonder WHY Google wants all my pictures and videos on their servers...
Plus, it's one of those things where 90% of tech-illiterate people probably do want it. So it can make some benign sense to spam it a bit -- though that obviously sounds excessive.
And if it were somehow to be the case that AI was capable of building amazing things, it would be the AI doing so, not people. You can go to a Michelin starred restaurant and order a world-class meal, but describing your order doesn't make you a chef. In the same way, describing what you want to an AI that simulates the work of countless artists doesn't make you an artist.
And no, this isn't equivalent to an artist using tools and filters in Photoshop (although Photoshop is now moving to integrating AI so it kind of is.) Those are tools that still require the skill and talent of an artist and allow a degree of direct control over the end result that AI doesn't.
ChatGPT can’t retain decent context to save its life but if you have the time, patience, and motivation to widdle away at a goal or a project you, yourself, can come out on the other side far more capable of building amazing things, thanks to AI. These are things you could have learned through other mediums, sure, but for a lot of people it is a far more natural experience akin to talking with a teacher, especially if you structure your prompts to feels as such.
I’m not ride-or-die AI over here but it has taken me from a painfully non-technical person, to someone who now has a vast interest and a growing, albeit slowly, skill set in a new hobby. It will be a long long time before I create something that isn’t derivative but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t been valuable along the way.
Meanwhile the tools to create in just about any medium are almost entirely freely available to anyone, and plenty of people are already creating tons of amazing things. AI isn't necessary for that, it's just a means for corporations to commoditize human creativity.
I think we're living a big evolution in tech and as a developer myself I think it will take time to really adopt those tools (and not fear them). For now, to be honest I don't see any big advantage using AI for code generation. However I think today stuff like ChatGPT are great dev rubber ducks. Sometime it helps you think and put you on the right path.
> There’s an odd feeling that whatever I am going to build will just get gobbled away by some big tech company.
I could be wrong but for now we're still in the hype train, AI companies are showing off everything they can to impress and raise as much money as possible (because their own subsistance is based on huge amount of money they're not able to generate by themselves). Don't get me wrong, what they are showing us is extremely impressive. But today I tend to think those tools will give more credit to the builders that will imagine and build apps and tools with something AI eats but doesn't have... Creativity, Taste and Imagination.
I might be a fool to believe that but If I compare that to cooking, even if you have restaurants where that only re-heat stuff that taste good, people still appreciate a good meal prepared with love by a real chef :)
So my only advice here is: be a chef, build what you think makes sense to you, be happy at what you're doing. Learn, try, brake and build but just don't stop doing it.