logoalt Hacker News

numpad0today at 9:32 AM1 replyview on HN

> it's harder and harder to spot, especially when the use is "thoughtful".

It's not, only suckers think otherwise. The more you consume, the easier it gets to spot them, and also you get bored of it quicker. Which is fine for an actual tool.

IMO: if you think it's problematic if people could spot AI tool marks, you're not actually viewing or using AI as a tool. Rocket scientists aren't ashamed of using high end 5-axis CNC or SLS laser metal 3D printers to make rocket engines. Good machinists can tell how they were made, and that should mostly inspire confidence. If someone thinks the tool marks for a specific type of a tool needs to be hidden for the artifacts to be trusted, there has to be something wrong somewhere with the tool or how it's used, or both. Likely both.

Anyone looking at a Boeing 787 can tell that it flies on a pair of turbofan engines, and it's cool. Most people looking at AI images can tell it's generated using AI, and some can even identify models used, and that is NOT cool. That should be a strong enough sign that something is wrong with AI.


Replies

ElProlactintoday at 9:43 AM

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48609233

This was on the front page for a while yesterday. A decent amount of discussion. I'm quite sure this was produced using AI.

I was the only person who mentioned it.

AI is really easy to spot if it's being used to do all the work. It's less easy to spot when it's being used as a starting point, for editorial passes, concept development, argument refinement, etc.