this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2025
1445 points (100.0% liked)

Programmer Humor

23025 readers
1470 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago (14 children)

I don't have enough time to learn I have to work to try and live the bleak few hours of life I get to myself a week. honestly with AI our bosses expect more it's slowing down

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 weeks ago (13 children)

You have my sympathies, but that still doesn't mean you get to post complete nonsensical garbage where a glass of water is talking for no reason, that took you less effort to create than it did to read, and expect people to not tell you to jog on, when there's a whole wealth of creative artists out there who are putting in the energy but getting their space flooded with slop.

The web has objectively become much, much worse in the past 12 months because quality is getting drowned out by quantity.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (12 children)

but that still doesn’t mean you get to post complete nonsensical garbage where a glass of water is talking for no reason

How dare Dali paint pictures with melting clocks! If the clocks really were hot enough to melt, they would set the tree they're melting on ablaze!!!!11

I get it. Artists are afraid of their income. But with those kinds of takes, "AI bad because surrealism" I can't take you seriously as an artist so I guess nothing would be lost.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Surrealism is not nonsense. It has a purpose, even if that purpose is hard to tell. If you think Dali and AI slop is the same, you don't understand either.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Fine. If it's offending your senses too much to be tame surrealism, call it dada. If you think that replacing a person with an object cannot be an artistic choice, you... well, haven't seen much art.

Note that I'm not arguing for or against AI here. I'm saying that your critique of AI is slop.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you think that replacing a person with an object cannot be an artistic choice

Literally nobody is saying or thinking that. What we are saying is that there is absolutely no way that OP's prompt contained "...and make the optimist BE the glass itself...".

The irony is that you're giving OP way more benefit of the doubt in your reading of what they produced than you've given me, and instead argued against a complete strawman.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

Literally nobody is saying or thinking that. What we are saying is that there is absolutely no way that OP’s prompt contained “…and make the optimist BE the glass itself…”.

So what? It's still a choice to keep this result, and not another. Artists capitalise on chance occurrence all the time.

The irony is that you’re giving OP way more benefit of the doubt in your reading of what they produced than you’ve given me,

OP is not here to defend themselves. They're also not digging themselves further into a hole.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

It's not dada. It's too coherent to be dada, and it's too shit to be anything else.

In order for something to be an artistic choice, it has to be a choice. It has to have meaning and intent. AI did not choose to put a glass there, it calculated that there was probably a glass there based on shitty reasoning. AI does not have the creative capacity to make art. It can only make images, and those images are shit.

You've thoroughly proven you can't tell between slop and high art, so thank you for the compliment of my critique.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

AI does not have the creative capacity to make art.

I agree!

And the same applies to cameras. That doesn't mean that photographs can't be art, though.

It’s not dada. It’s too coherent to be dada, and it’s too shit to be anything else.

TBH my first instinct was trolling, especially as it's easy to overlook when you're just reading the text, not focussing on anything else. Point is when you'd hang this thing in an exhibition the audience would go all "ahh" and examine the mechanism.

The academic art world is beset nowadays with blurbs of barely intelligible critical theory to justify themselves, I find a fresh amateur artists saying "oh that's interesting, neat, let's keep it" much more interesting.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)