Hacker News Reader

Like this one https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27710287 But in the same time I can admit that I didn't do the formal counting of comments, so saying "majority" may be technically incorrect. It was more of an impression from reading comments that many people are negative about copilot (possibly for a right reason, I don't know, I haven't played with it)

View on HN

I have the same leaning as you. I have been following the AI art commentary and noticed that the language learning models are commented on more critically. My take is that a large portion of the commenters for AI art believe that artists learn to make art by copying existing art, so having a computer do the same is a non issue. The reality is that artists learn to use tools and materials to express art, although there are some that copy, it is not the norm. Artists study other artists to be literate in the field, not to simply regurgitate existing imagery. There is an attitude of 'the artists are jealous that anybody can now make art' even though AI art could not exist without being fed human artistic skill and effort. Any public online portfolio is now free game for AI to scoop, 'too bad, they shouldn't have put it online....These are the most vociferous viewpoints. AI art is not to be criticized, lest we are jealous luddites, yet I have found lots of thoughtful, balanced criticisms and discussions in the AI language and coding commentary.

The scale is conveniently ignored a lot of the time. The model can analyze art far faster than any person can appreciate the same volume.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com