Like, every AI generated thing I’ve seen, when viewed from the eyes of someone who actually knows what they’re doing, is at best below average. Maybe some things aren’t quite as bad as the general “AI slop”, but of the things I’m actually experienced in (code and art), I just see so many amateur mistakes in everything AI.

Regarding art, AI can make really visually appealing things, but it gets the details wrong. That’s something that a below average artist does. And regarding code, it’s the same thing. Overall, it has the appearance of decent code, but it gets the details wrong, just like a below average dev. (Probably about the level of a high school senior or college freshman.)

I’m not super experienced at writing, but I can also tell that it’s not very good at that. The stories it writes just aren’t compelling, but I’m not experienced enough to tell you why. And the same with music. It’s just below average, but I couldn’t tell you why.

I’m not trying to sound elitist by saying this, but I’ve noticed people who aren’t very good at these things tend to praise how good the AI is.

So, is it just me, or are the big fans of AI just below average at whatever the AI is doing?

  • ZDL@lazysoci.al
    11·
    1 day ago

    Oh, it gets so much more entertaining than this.

    • Competent artists I know say that degenerative AI will never be able to do art, but they think it may be fine someday for writing or coding or such.
    • Competent writers I know laugh at degenerative AI’s ever replacing them, but are pretty sure that someday it may replace coders or musicians.
    • Competent coders I know shake their heads at even the very thought of degenerative AIs replacing them for anything more than rote work, but acknowledge that they’d likely be fine for music or art.
    • Competent musicians laugh at the prospect of degenerative AIs ever making decent music, but nod sagely that it’s probably fine for art or writing.

    It’s like a circle jerk of Gell-Mann.